American Central Power, Dutch Ally Power; effects?

Let's assume that the United States joins the Central powers, while the Netherlands joins the Allies. My guess is that this would result in an Central Power victory, but I am actually curious about what territorial changes should I expect. Many threads talk about what the various central powers would take if they won. What I wonder is what should I expect the Netherlands to lose, and what would the Americans take?
 
Let's assume that the United States joins the Central powers, while the Netherlands joins the Allies. My guess is that this would result in an Central Power victory, but I am actually curious about what territorial changes should I expect. Many threads talk about what the various central powers would take if they won. What I wonder is what should I expect the Netherlands to lose, and what would the Americans take?

I'm more than willing to contribute, I only ask you clarify when and (For the U.S, especially) why both are entering the war. That will have a HUGE impact on how "dragged in"/ dedicated each side feels about the situation and as a result what they're likely to demand.
 
The British will need to make a huge effort to defend the Caribbean, since I suspect whatever the Americans aren't sending to fight in Canada will be sent to the Caribbean (or to the Pacific against the Japanese, but the Americans will probably be on the defensive there).

I would expect the main islands to be grabbed would be the Bahamas and Bermuda for their proximity to the US and strategic location respectively, and maybe Trinidad (and Tobago) and Aruba thanks to proximity to Venezuela and known oil reserves. The rest of the Caribbean would be more of a bargaining chip to the British in other negotiations, although it would be hilarious if the US gains the British Virgin Islands (and thus they become the US Virgin Islands) while presumably Denmark keeps the Danish Virgin Islands. But perhaps the US might keep the Caribbean, in which you'd have a host of various US territories which may or may not gain independence or statehood.

Regarding Canada, I don't think it would be annexed by the US or lose much land, but would end up permanently severed from the British Empire with its political system completely changed.
 
I'm more than willing to contribute, I only ask you clarify when and (For the U.S, especially) why both are entering the war. That will have a HUGE impact on how "dragged in"/ dedicated each side feels about the situation and as a result what they're likely to demand.

In my timeline, US/UK relations are a lot more tense, we see the Venezuelan crisis of 1895 result in a short war between the Americans and British, as well as British support for the Spanish in the Spanish American War.

The Netherlands are only sort of ally powers. They support the Allies and respect their treaties with Belgium. Fearing the German threat, they see the allies as, well, allies.
 
In my timeline, US/UK relations are a lot more tense, we see the Venezuelan crisis of 1895 result in a short war between the Americans and British, as well as British support for the Spanish in the Spanish American War.

The Netherlands are only sort of ally powers. They support the Allies and respect their treaties with Belgium. Fearing the German threat, they see the allies as, well, allies.

... so, what is the general date (Year and season, at least) of the Americans joining in and the instigating incident?
 
As others say we may need to know more. When is the US joining the war? How prepared is it, OTLs unpreparedness or larger Germany across the Atlantic or something in the middle?

As for territory, depends on Japan and the Philippines, if Japan goes all in and overruns them the US will be limited in its gains, while if Japan is less enthusiastic and has bad luck and there is a US Corps holding out on Mindanao or Bataan when the treaty is signed they won't have to bargain for it back
 
What causes the US to join the war on the other side? Maybe the British sink American ships headed to Germany? We could have ended up at war with the UK for the same reason we went to war with them 100 years earlier.

It sounds like in this scenario, the US could get hurt in the Pacific having to face the UK and Japan together, but gain in the Americas (US takes Canada and some British territory in the Caribbean). Another wild card is who is President in this timeline-a more hawkish president like TR means an earlier entry into the war and more territorial gains than with a president who delays like Wilson did IOTL.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
In my timeline, US/UK relations are a lot more tense, we see the Venezuelan crisis of 1895 result in a short war between the Americans and British
No way someone like Salisbury, who was arguably the best British diplomat of his time, would let this happen
 
The British will need to make a huge effort to defend the Caribbean, since I suspect whatever the Americans aren't sending to fight in Canada will be sent to the Caribbean (or to the Pacific against the Japanese, but the Americans will probably be on the defensive there).

I would expect the main islands to be grabbed would be the Bahamas and Bermuda for their proximity to the US and strategic location respectively, and maybe Trinidad (and Tobago) and Aruba thanks to proximity to Venezuela and known oil reserves.
Aruba hasn't got oil and the refineries were only build by Shell after 1914.

No way someone like Salisbury, who was arguably the best British diplomat of his time, would let this happen
There is a TL in the well-known What If? anthology about this where Salisbury is indisposed and the diplomacy is done by Joseph Chamberlain.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
If the US is determined to get an expanded world position as part of a victorious CP it can take the Dutch West Indies and Indonesia as well as reclaim the Philippines.

If the mindset is different enough to permit a CP US, it could be different enough to favor a more expansive overseas colonialism.
 
America would annex Canada and the Caribbean Territories of the Allies and make Quebec a Puppet State

Canada had its own distinct identity at that point and it would be easier to make Canada into a puppet state than a territory/state. Were there that many calls to annex Canada in the US in the 1910s?

Newfoundland's a different question, however--I could see the US making Newfoundland a territory given its strategic importance and for control of the Grand Banks. They'd attach St. Pierre et Miquelon to the island as well.

Aruba hasn't got oil and the refineries were only build by Shell after 1914.

That is true, but it's close to Venezuela so refinery or not, it makes sense to annex the island if you're going to annex any part of the Caribbean.
 
If the USA enters the war, they'e going to build up their force and know who is the biggest threat. They'l be ready for Japan.

On the other hand, if they'e forced in before they'e ready, itll.be some time before gains are made and Japan may come out stronger and make gains against the US
 
If the USA enters the war, they'e going to build up their force and know who is the biggest threat. They'l be ready for Japan.

On the other hand, if they'e forced in before they'e ready, itll.be some time before gains are made and Japan may come out stronger and make gains against the US

But can 1910s US win in both the Atlantic against the British (plus France and the Dutch) AND win in the Pacific against Japan (and once again, the British, French, and Dutch)? I think the US can win on one front and hold their ground on the other, and since Canada is the most immediately threatening, the main effort will be spent in Canada and the Caribbean while the US is mainly on the defensive against the Japanese in the Philippines.

One thing's for sure--the US Marines are going to be hugely expanded for the challenges of the Caribbean campaign. Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti will be added to the Central Powers as well and will assist the United States in whatever way they can (probably not much, but there will be American troops stationed there and there still might be occupations of those nations as IOTL). Probably the same goes with Central America. There might be more US intervention in Mexico to prevent Entente interference there. South America can probably be kept neutral so Brazil won't join the fight against the Central Powers due to American pressure.
 
Canada had its own distinct identity at that point and it would be easier to make Canada into a puppet state than a territory/state.
Its full of Protestant Anglo-Saxons , This isn't going to be like TL191 where the Us is actively suppressing Canadians and there is a large Canadian insurgency between the cultural ties , the low Canadian population, the lack of political discrimination and political integration . Canada is not going to be difficult for the Us to annex .
 
Good point. I think the US two way front will be against Canada and the Carribean. I don't think the US will need to focus on the Atlantic so much if they control Canada.

In the Pacific, they can either attempt a decisive battle with the Japanese navy, so they'e not a problem or face the Japanese on island defense. Notably the Phillipines, which will be more balanced than 1942.

On the otherhand, I don' know how popular the US was in the Philippines at the time.
 
But can 1910s US win in both the Atlantic against the British (plus France and the Dutch) AND win in the Pacific against Japan (and once again, the British, French, and Dutch)? I think the US can win on one front and hold their ground on the other, and since Canada is the most immediately threatening, the main effort will be spent in Canada and the Caribbean while the US is mainly on the defensive against the Japanese in the Philippines.

One thing's for sure--the US Marines are going to be hugely expanded for the challenges of the Caribbean campaign. Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti will be added to the Central Powers as well and will assist the United States in whatever way they can (probably not much, but there will be American troops stationed there and there still might be occupations of those nations as IOTL). Probably the same goes with Central America. There might be more US intervention in Mexico to prevent Entente interference there. South America can probably be kept neutral so Brazil won't join the fight against the Central Powers due to American pressure.
US victory in that case depends. If the USN got a really high funding level from 1906, I would say that is certain, whereas OTL spending it would suffer. It would depend on exactly how in between it was, and how the UK reacts

The Dutch Navy is basically an irrelevance against the US in this period, it doesn't have any modern capital ships and few other units (they planned on a buildup, then WWI happened). France, well that depends on Italy, Italy neutral and the MN is staying in the Med to contain the K.u.K. Marine, Italy CP and they are probably begging the UK for reinforcements, Italy Entente and they could be a factor. The UK, well has to deal with the HSF. OTL the UK wanted a 5:3 superiority, on order to account for maintenance and luck, OTL that is pretty much all of their modern units tied down, if they spent more they could spare some, but would be outnumbered by the US and sending them to their deaths

Japan, that depends. They can't really afford a bigger navy than OTL without a huge POD. With an OTL sized USN, the USN would need about everything to go on the offensive, which would let the RN operate in penny packets off the East Coast, but the US could easily afford a much larger navy that could scare off an RN battle squadron and BC division in the Atlantic while beating down the IJN in the Pacific
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Imagine the American Fleet appears in Jutland on German side.

Also, the CPs can just sit back and wait for Britain to run out of oil. Job done.
 
Its full of Protestant Anglo-Saxons , This isn't going to be like TL191 where the Us is actively suppressing Canadians and there is a large Canadian insurgency between the cultural ties , the low Canadian population, the lack of political discrimination and political integration . Canada is not going to be difficult for the Us to annex .

True, but what about the American arguments against annexing Canada? Does the President and Congress really want to just suddenly annex Canada and spend the time incorporating it into the US (adding the Canadian states to Congress would change up American politics certainly), or would they rather have a Canadian Republic as an ally?

US victory in that case depends. If the USN got a really high funding level from 1906, I would say that is certain, whereas OTL spending it would suffer. It would depend on exactly how in between it was, and how the UK reacts

The Dutch Navy is basically an irrelevance against the US in this period, it doesn't have any modern capital ships and few other units (they planned on a buildup, then WWI happened). France, well that depends on Italy, Italy neutral and the MN is staying in the Med to contain the K.u.K. Marine, Italy CP and they are probably begging the UK for reinforcements, Italy Entente and they could be a factor. The UK, well has to deal with the HSF. OTL the UK wanted a 5:3 superiority, on order to account for maintenance and luck, OTL that is pretty much all of their modern units tied down, if they spent more they could spare some, but would be outnumbered by the US and sending them to their deaths

Japan, that depends. They can't really afford a bigger navy than OTL without a huge POD. With an OTL sized USN, the USN would need about everything to go on the offensive, which would let the RN operate in penny packets off the East Coast, but the US could easily afford a much larger navy that could scare off an RN battle squadron and BC division in the Atlantic while beating down the IJN in the Pacific

But what does France have in the Caribbean to oppose the United States, and how much will France protect Martinique, Guadeloupe, etc.? We can assume the Dutch will protect their colonies, especially in the case of the Dutch East Indies, although they don't have much to spare. France of course has Indochina (with rubber production) as a colony to protect and base fleets in. The Pacific is definitely where the main threat to the United States is.

Imagine the American Fleet appears in Jutland on German side.

Also, the CPs can just sit back and wait for Britain to run out of oil. Job done.

The thing is getting them to Jutland. They need to go through the GIUK gap or through the Channel. Now, it would be interesting if the USN decides to go through the Channel, thus inviting the Royal Navy for a battle and arranging things so the High Seas Fleet sorties out to their aid, but I doubt the Royal Navy is stupid enough to go for that, and besides, it's a very risky move to do so.
 
Remember that the Americans maintained a relevantly small army in 1917, and while their army increased from 100 000 regulars in 1914 to 2.3 million in 1917, their forces in canada would consist of mostly militia forces, saving regulars troops for the Pacific and European theatres. While the US Militia is also estimated to consist of 2 million, many of these had never even held a rifle before. Compare this to the Canadians, who had only 620 000 regulars and just as many militia*. Hell, The Germans went so far as to call them ''Storm Troopers'' for their great combat efficiency.

Through out Canadian history, Canada has been known to have a small but mighty military. To the people saying that Canada would be taken over extremely easily, I point out the war of 1812, in which the Canadian army stood at only 62 000 [including British soldiers, Provincial regulars and militia] against the combined army and militia of America which at the time was well over half a million.

While the Canadians are not going to win this war, the idea of them being annexed by America is laughable at best.

* The Article is strangely worded here, stating the Canadian military at 620 000 but saying the militia was a separate division. The link to that division states its size as 620 000 as well.
 
Top