AH Cliches: American Isolationism

kernals12

Banned
Only if they somehow were able to keep Korea as a colony. Let's assume a population of 150 million (no Pacific War, Taiwan, Karafuto, and South Pacific Mandate still part of Japan). That would give an GDP of about 3 trillion USD, between OTL France and Germany but significantly less than modern Japan. They'd need to spend over 10% of their GDP on the military to match US spending, and they're still resource poor. Compare that to the USSR with a significantly larger population and massive amounts of resources. The main advantage is that they can afford to build up a large navy as unlike the USSR, Japan is naturally a naval power.

If they somehow were able to keep Korea, though, then they'd be a lot more of a threat, given Korea adds a significant amount of people and more importantly, a massive amount of resources.
With no other countries stopping them, they could annex most of China including resource rich Mongolia.
 
With no other countries stopping them, they could annex most of China including resource rich Mongolia.

And fight an endless and extremely costly guerrilla war (as OTL), not counting that Russia/URSS will not like Japan going even more on what she consider his backyard.
 
With no other countries stopping them, they could annex most of China including resource rich Mongolia.

... except other countries WOULD stop them, because they're also exploiting China economically and won't give in to a Japanese monopoly over that massive market and source of raw resources without a struggle. Britain, Germany, France, the US... all will be more than willing to use economic and political pressure to limit any gains Japan can make outside of a naked war of conquest, which Japan dosen't have the domestic resource base to sustain in the event those other powers shut off the import tap in protest.
 

kernals12

Banned
... except other countries WOULD stop them, because they're also exploiting China economically and won't give in to a Japanese monopoly over that massive market and source of raw resources without a struggle. Britain, Germany, France, the US... all will be more than willing to use economic and political pressure to limit any gains Japan can make outside of a naked war of conquest, which Japan dosen't have the domestic resource base to sustain in the event those other powers shut off the import tap in protest.
Japan's actions in China during the 1930s IOTL raised little concern.
 
Japan's actions in China during the 1930s IOTL raised little concern.

Aside from Japan quitting the League of Nations over international condemnation of their puppet state in Manchuria. The Second Sino-Japanese War, the inevitable atrocities, and Japan interfering in other nations spheres in China probably would cause a bit more than that. And once Japan starts running low on resources to keep the Chinese front going, they either have to go into Russia or go into European colonies in Southeast Asia.
 

kernals12

Banned
Aside from Japan quitting the League of Nations over international condemnation of their puppet state in Manchuria. The Second Sino-Japanese War, the inevitable atrocities, and Japan interfering in other nations spheres in China probably would cause a bit more than that. And once Japan starts running low on resources to keep the Chinese front going, they either have to go into Russia or go into European colonies in Southeast Asia.
A. Was that international condemnation anything more than a paper tiger? The US kept supplying Japan until 1941, and they only stopped because of the latter's support for the Nazis.
B. With no World War I, is there even a league of nations?
 
A. Was that international condemnation anything more than a paper tiger? The US kept supplying Japan until 1941, and they only stopped because of the latter's support for the Nazis.
B. With no World War I, is there even a league of nations?

Japan's actions in China during the 1930s IOTL raised little concern.

This is my point; without a WWI you're dealing with fundimentally different circumstances than OTL: a less exhausted, more morally sure of itself and still colonially-expansive and focused Europe, for one. Nor would we be seeing the kind of turmoil created by the Treaty of Versailles (and the spats between the nations created by it) and rise of Facism and Communism in Europe that kept the Great Power's attention on immediate threats closer to home. Japan would NEVER be allowed to get away with the same power-grabbing that it did IOTL with such conditions.
 
The world economy was more globalized in 1913 in many respects than what it is today. Both the USA and Russia would rise. Russian economic recovery from the Russo-Japanese war was a factor in the start of WW1. Russia will probably seek a second round with Japan in the early 1920's. The 8-8 plan will be built against Russia and not the US. Europe was moving towards a 'cold war' status with the CP vs the Franco-Russian alliance with GB as the King-maker. French military spending was up around 4-5% GDP. Most of the other were at 2-3% - like today. Arms races don't cause wars, if they did then we'd all be dead. Paying insurance doesn't cause accidents.

The US was meddling in European affairs in 1914 by funneling ships to Greece as the Turko-Greek headed towards war. This is way outside the US's 'sphere'.

The unknown is how quickly can China stabilise as a republic. Without WW1, Japan is about equal with Italy but Italy is a small fish in Europe while Japan is without rivals in Asia. Japan wont assert itself against China while the US and Europe has the power to intervene.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The US was meddling in European affairs in 1914 by funneling ships to Greece as the Turko-Greek headed towards war. This is way outside the US's 'sphere'.

Meddling as a matter of government policy?

Or had the Greeks just saved enough drachmas up that American shipbuilders were happy to do business? And they wouldn't have sold the same ships for Turkish Lira?
 
A. Was that international condemnation anything more than a paper tiger? The US kept supplying Japan until 1941, and they only stopped because of the latter's support for the Nazis.

That's a lie international sanctions had slowly been hitting on Japan following the 2nd Sino Japanese war scrap metal, cancelling trade agreements and slowly reducing Japanese access to US markets and restricting access to US credit and you also had France and Britain giving tacit approval to the KMT for use of the Haiphong railroad and the Burma and Ledo roads to transport supplies and goods into and out of the country "
 
I am sorry but this thread seems very much like American propaganda...with all this "America is the beacon of liberty" and "he shining light of liberalism", it just lacks all the talking about manifest destiny and "liberating Canada".
 
Meddling as a matter of government policy?

Or had the Greeks just saved enough drachmas up that American shipbuilders were happy to do business? And they wouldn't have sold the same ships for Turkish Lira?
None of the Balkan powers had money, they were all chasing loans. I'd say that it was US money they were able to secure. Bethlehem Steel had sold armament and plate to Greece for a ship building in Germany, New York Ship Building offloaded a cruiser building for the Chinese that the Chinese wanted to sell but the US government sold 2 1908 vintage pre-Dreadnoughts to Greece. Not something that the US Government usually did. The Greeks were desperate and President Wilson obliged. Considering that the European powers were backing the Turks and wanting the dispute over islands settled peacefully, the US arming Greece would be disquieting for them seeing that the Med was remote to US interests.
 
Top