Delayed ww1: Plausibility of a second Japanese war and possible outcome

...there was also War Plan Red, and yet America and Britain got along just fine at this time, and afterwards.

My point is, for all the the USA was preparing contingencies, they weren't default hostile to Japanese goals until Japan acted on them with the 21 Demands.

No...

The US built for Scarlet, too. With people like King, later, it is easy to see that relations between the US and the UK were never "good" the way popular historians make the populaces believe. There were hot-button issues like India, British exclusion of American goods from British controlled territories, clashes over oil interests, some nasty stuff involving Venezuela, etc. And the issue over who would rule the oceans. The USN was hellbent on ending the Royal Navy as the top navy, one way or another. Guess what happened under Roosevelt? (the other one.)

In modern terms it is almost like the PRC and the USA today. Rising power scraping elbows with a decliner. It could go UGLY very quickly.
 
Assuming WWI is butterflied, then Britain is likely to renew the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1922. Similarly, Russia bringing China into its sphere of influence will alarm America, and they will likely strengthen their ties with Britain and Japan, to counter the increasing Russian influence in Europe and China.
The US would probably be putting pressure on the UK to not renew it.
 
What about German New Guinea, isn't this the reason that Japan got in IOTL WW I?
If this is the case, the that could means that the United States will ally with Germany against Japan and Great Britain.
 

cpip

Gone Fishin'
...there was also War Plan Red, and yet America and Britain got along just fine at this time, and afterwards.

My point is, for all the the USA was preparing contingencies, they weren't default hostile to Japanese goals until Japan acted on them with the 21 Demands.

However, on no less than two occasions before that -- 1907 and 1913 -- there were brief war scares, with the General Board in 1913 advising the president that war was "not only possible but probable". Wilson managed to calm the second war scare (and asserted his control over the military while he was at it), but certainly there were jingoists on both sides of the Pacific who were anticipating the war.

The US would probably be putting pressure on the UK to not renew it.

Not just the US, but also the Canadians, as they didn't want to get dragged into something if the Japanese and the Americans did get into a conflict.
 
What about German New Guinea, isn't this the reason that Japan got in IOTL WW I?

If this is the case, the that could means that the United States will ally with Germany against Japan and Great Britain.

I don't think so. I can see in an ATL, the United States seizing the following in a spoiler attack: Kaiser-Wilhelmsland, Bismarck Archipelago, German Solomon Islands or Northern Solomon Islands, Bougainville Island, Nauru, Marshall Islands, Mariana Islands, Caroline Islands, and of course "German" Samoa.

But McKinley did not see it that way, and during the Paris negotiations (1898) ignored his own ministers and his own NAVY, when for the paltry sum of a couple dozen millions he could have snapped up all that real estate. America had another chance in 1914, when Wilson (a person, who in my opinion, made hundreds of geopolitical mistakes, poking his nose in where he ought to not, and not seizing advantage, when it was offered to him on a silver platter.) passed on snapping up that "German" real estate, before America's known chief Pacific opponent took it for herself.

Biak, Peleliu, RABAUL, Bougainville, Chu'uk (Truk), Tarawa. Some 30,000 American and almost 180,000 Japanese lives might have been spared if the ATL had been followed through.

Land geography dictates how sea-power is used. That is Mahan. If the geography is in enemy hands, then it limits your sea-power.
 
Top