Deleted member 93645
With a POD 1880 or later, how could a coalition of two or more European empires invade the United States before 1920?
If they tried, how unsuccessful would they be?
If they tried, how unsuccessful would they be?
AHC/WI: European Empires invade the US in early 20th century
Alexmonroe
Banned
Several European powers develop interest in South America and ignore the Monroe doctrin. The US declares war.
And the European powers would be pretty successful if one of the powers at war with the US would be Britain. That way the Europeans can pour in millions of troops into Canada and attack from there.
Ehh... Canada would be overrun by the US before any significant amount of enemy forces arrive. There's no way that anyone can get away with a military buildup in Canada without provoking the US to do something and stop it.
There'd be parts they couldn't reach in time, ports they couldn't totally overrun, and ways to keep the supply chain open. An Anglo-German alliance (with a Germany committing to naval expansionism and colonialism early) has the best shot at this, since they can use Canada as a base. Try and get Russia on their side too somehow, that might be able to accomplish something. Mexico would help too, because it gives another place to base troops in. Also maybe Brazil and Chile as allies, for better supply lines, distraction, resources (copper!), and naval forces from the South American dreadnought race which were among the strongest in the Western hemisphere at the time. Combined, that would be a force to overwhelm the US Navy and launch a two-front invasion from Canada and Mexico.
Your next step is answering the question why might these countries ally together to launch an invasion that would be massively costly in both human lives and wasted economic potential.
Yuelang
Banned
How about US vs British War started by good ol' USA tries to take the western part of British North America by force? That way, the US would be rightfully seen as aggressor and the (admittedly low) population of Canada would have good motivations to resist the US onslaught...
And later on Germany, Russia, Japan, and even the Ottomans (for some reasons) decides to help Britain out. Russia declares that they want Alaska back and invade from there, Japan invade the pacific islands and raid American west coast, Germany enter a pact with Britain to help reinforce Canada (at the measly cost of lifting Naval restrictions and giving them free hands somewhere later), Ottoman just get in for shits and giggles.
And later on Germany, Russia, Japan, and even the Ottomans (for some reasons) decides to help Britain out. Russia declares that they want Alaska back and invade from there, Japan invade the pacific islands and raid American west coast, Germany enter a pact with Britain to help reinforce Canada (at the measly cost of lifting Naval restrictions and giving them free hands somewhere later), Ottoman just get in for shits and giggles.
Sounds ASB as fuck.The US state Department must be staffed by idiots for a massive coalition across the seas to be formed against it.
Last edited:
At the start of the Spanish-American War, Germany advocated a united European stand against the US, which the others refused. (Had they accepted and threatened America with intervention, the US would probably have backed down). However, there is the possibility that Germany decides to go it alone and help the Spaniards, in exchange for certain Pacific colonies. The war would be won or lost by who gained naval supremacy in the Carribbean, so there wouldn't actually be any invasion of mainland US though...
Riain
Banned
I won't speculate on how a coalition would arise and find itself in a desperate war with the USA, that strikes me as 'unlikely'. However prior to WW1 during peacetime the US military wasn't very powerful and the US Army in particular was tiny, something like 100,000 regulars and 112,000 national Guard and the regular army only went to a permanent divisional structure in 1912 with 3 or 4 divisions. The 1916 National Defence Act did something about that, authorising an increase in the Army to over 200,000 and the NG to over 450,000, it was on this planned expansion that the AEF was built after the US entered WW1 10 months later.
So prior to 1916 the US Navy would have been pretty tough but the US Army not so much given the amount of ground it would have to cover which could leave the US vulnerable to the unlikely coalition if the coalition acted quickly.
So prior to 1916 the US Navy would have been pretty tough but the US Army not so much given the amount of ground it would have to cover which could leave the US vulnerable to the unlikely coalition if the coalition acted quickly.
Even the US Navy was getting pretty shitty, in the period just prior to the Spanish-American War, to the extent sailors were complaining about being mocked for their antiquated ships wherever they went.
Then they decided to go with a nice little naval expansion, and since the had all these fancy new ships, why not use them against Spain in 1898?
TFSmith121
Banned
All else as historical to 1880?
Never happens. All powers can get what they wish economically through trade, the Europeans are expanding against limited opposition in Africa, the European powers are increasingly all at each other's throats in the same period, the US is a formidable industrial and demographic power, none of the European powers can conduct expeditionary warfare against a peer competitor at transoceanic distances, etc.
Then there are those minor obstacles called the Atlantic and Pacific. Geography is a thing.
Oh yeah, what's the political goal for the combatants in any of this, again?
Best,
Last edited:
Riain
Banned
So how quickly could the US equip a bigger army from its own resources in say 1905-1912 time period?
It's easy to get men into uniform and teach them to march and even manoeuvre and shoot although it does take up a lot of manpower from the existing troops, so what cadres/reserves exist to rapidly expand training? In WW1 the AEF used a lot of French and British equipment, particularly French artillery, so what would the production curve of artillery and shells be under a dire threat and actual invasion and how many units could be equipped with these production figures: eg. 1 extra division in 2 months, 2 extra divisions in 6 months or whatever?
It's easy to get men into uniform and teach them to march and even manoeuvre and shoot although it does take up a lot of manpower from the existing troops, so what cadres/reserves exist to rapidly expand training? In WW1 the AEF used a lot of French and British equipment, particularly French artillery, so what would the production curve of artillery and shells be under a dire threat and actual invasion and how many units could be equipped with these production figures: eg. 1 extra division in 2 months, 2 extra divisions in 6 months or whatever?
Last edited:
Pretty much this. I mean, I don't mean any offense to people enjoying this thread but so many of these alt-WWI analogues aren't really alternative histories as much as Great Power Top Trumps where what matters is the hardware and the military strategy and no attention or importance is given to the motivations that drove this supposed war.
I was thinking along the lines of the quote from Casablanca - "There are certain sections of New York major I wouldn't advise you to invade."
I don't think it's impossible/ASB for a Eurasian hegemony to evade North America. It is doable even with a POD that doesn't butterfly away the United States. The reverse has already happened in our timeline during WW2.
IMHO the best way to subdue America is to take control of the Mississippi. It's the linchpin on the Continent. Forget about the east or west coast, because those mountains are gonna kill all invasion attempts. The gulf is where it's at, due to the oil.
The Europeans need to care about Latin America for it to work.
IMHO the best way to subdue America is to take control of the Mississippi. It's the linchpin on the Continent. Forget about the east or west coast, because those mountains are gonna kill all invasion attempts. The gulf is where it's at, due to the oil.
The Europeans need to care about Latin America for it to work.
TFSmith121
Banned
Historically, or in alternate world where - presumably - the Prussians control Europe, including the newly-integrated German kingdoms of Russenland, Ostereich, Scandenlandt, Frankreich, Anglelandt, Keltenlandt, and Escotenlandt?
Because that's what would be necessary for an eastern hemisphere power to even consider trying to invade the Western Hemisphere in the Twentieth Century...
And they'd still lose.
That big blue thing? Pretty significant obstacle, considering it took the most of the USN, RN, MN, and the Allied merchant marines, plus the surplus of the British and French war economies in 1917-18 to get a 2 million man expeditionary force across the Atlantic and into action...
And there were six million more doughs in the pipeline...
There's a reason the only power to do this sort of thing in modern history was the US in 1917-18 and 1941-45.
Best,