AHC A more Francophile America?

Titus_Pullo

Banned
The special relationship with England is a relatively recent phenomenon, after World War 2 when Chruchill coined the term. For much of the 19th century Anglo-American relations were lukewarm at best, antoganistic at worst. What would need to happen for the Us to be more 'francophile' into the 21st century?
 
The special relationship with England is a relatively recent phenomenon, after World War 2 when Chruchill coined the term. For much of the 19th century Anglo-American relations were lukewarm at best, antoganistic at worst. What would need to happen for the Us to be more 'francophile' into the 21st century?

-The British Empire trying to meddle in North/South Americas affairs.

-More overt support for the Confederacy.

-Another French-British War would help.

-Maybe a border conflict between the US and Canada, or even some people trying to extend Manifest Destiny into Canada: leaving Britain our enemy and France a helpful ally.
 
That's more Anglophobic than Francophilic. You'd need to get rid of De Gaulle at least, he in himself was a huge block to any such relationship.
 

Titus_Pullo

Banned
-The British Empire trying to meddle in North/South Americas affairs.

-More overt support for the Confederacy.

-Another French-British War would help.

-Maybe a border conflict between the US and Canada, or even some people trying to extend Manifest Destiny into Canada: leaving Britain our enemy and France a helpful ally.


And maybe no World War 1 or 2? Or still have those wars with different alliances and for different reasons?
 
Who would you replace him with?

Georges Mandel would be a favorable choice in the eyes of Churchill (and presumably Roosevelt later on) if you could get him to defect to the Free French in '40. Having a civilian politician at the helm of the Free French might shake things up in interesting ways, too.
 
That's more Anglophobic than Francophilic. You'd need to get rid of De Gaulle at least, he in himself was a huge block to any such relationship.
I disagree without De Gaulle there would be no organised Free France during the WWII.
And he is far from being xenophobic. It's roosvelt who hated him from the start and tried numerous time to replace him by officers from Vichy France. Without De Gaulle France would have been under a Allied Military Government of Occupied Territories like Germany.
 
Last edited:
I disagree without De Gaulle there would be no organised Free France during the WWII.
And he is far from being xenophobic. It's roosvelt who hated him from the start and tried numerous time to replace him by officers from Vichy France.
De Gaulle wasnt xenophobic, he was egotistic.

Which might actually be worse when it comes to friendly relations maybe.
 
He beleived very strongly in DeGaulle...

I do agree with you the Roosevelt is a big part of the problem. His dislike/distrust of DeGaulle led to all sorts of issues.
 
I disagree without De Gaulle there would be no organised Free France during the WWII.
And he is far from being xenophobic. It's roosvelt who hated him from the start and tried numerous time to replace him by officers from Vichy France. Without De Gaulle France would have been under a Allied Military Government of Occupied Territories like Germany.

What about having De Gaulle die sometime after the Free French are organized but before he became French president? Say he ends up like Patton and dies in a car accident at the end of the war.
 
What about having De Gaulle die sometime after the Free French are organized but before he became French president? Say he ends up like Patton and dies in a car accident at the end of the war.
How would this make america more Francophile? I am in the opinion that to do this you need a pod bedore 1900.
 
How would this make america more Francophile?

You presumably avoid De Gaulle's presidency and the various things he did which annoyed the US like partially pulling out of NATO. You also can have a French president who is simply less egotistical and easier to work with.
 
You presumably avoid De Gaulle's presidency and the various things he did which annoyed the US like partially pulling out of NATO. You also can have a French president who is simply less egotistical and easier to work with.
i think the french would have pulled from NATO anyway;
there a very proud people who like the us don't want anyone thinking there above them
 
How would this make america more Francophile? I am in the opinion that to do this you need a pod bedore 1900.

Why? France was looked upon pretty well (Lafayette and all that) for a very long time.

It took a combination of WW1 and unpaid loans plus a perception that the French weren't greatful for American participation plus the amateurish way FDR & co dealt with DeGaulle to really damage that perception.
 
i think the french would have pulled from NATO anyway;
there a very proud people who like the us don't want anyone thinking there above them

I'm not so sure. Plus anyone but De Gaulle would have been a lot more diplomatic about it. They might still pull out a bit but in a manner that doesn't seem so nasty and petty. The large French arms industry could be used to justify not totally being in NATO. National pride could be the reason in domestic politics but sold to the rest of NATO as a way to preserve an arms industry arming many of NATOs overseas allies in the '60s like Israel and South Africa. No De Gaulle probably changes the nature of the French nuclear program and eventual nuclear weapons arsenal and doctrine as well.
 
You presumably avoid De Gaulle's presidency and the various things he did which annoyed the US like partially pulling out of NATO. You also can have a French president who is simply less egotistical and easier to work with.
I never heard De Gaulle being egotistical. And the crisis that lead to France distancing itself from america was not even under him it all started with the Suez crisis.
 
Top