Fate of Canada in case of Central Powers US?

Discussion in 'Alternate History Discussion: After 1900' started by StealthyMarat, Feb 7, 2019.

  1. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    Let's say that Trent affair led to a war between US and GB. War ended in 1862, with Union paying small reparations, and losing northern part(or all) of Maine. Confederacy is beaten by enraged Union, leading to MUCH MORE brutal Reconstruction, with former CSA under military occupation up to first part of 1880's.
    No butterflies fly, in Europe all went as it was OTL. Americans are feeling themselves humiliated by Wars of 1812 and 1861, and thus, in last years of XIX century secretly ally themselves with German Empire. WW1 breaks out as OTL because of certain Serbian, certain bullet, and certain archduke. On August 1914 world went into flames, with almost all countries of Europe fighting Great War. US, under TR declared war on Entente Powers...
    Question: Would Canucks hold on until 1917-18?
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2019
    Vornado and Whiteshore like this.
  2. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    Or shall US flag get some new stars by 1940?
     
  3. Saint_007 The King Of Nothing

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Canada will suffer heavy damage to most of its cities, pretty much, though it will still inflict considerable damage on the USA in the meantime - plenty of border, not all of it can be policed properly. I'd say an occupation and especially annexation is out of the question. I could see Quebec being liberated to be a US puppet.

    The US will simply take all the territory Canada 'stole' from it. I'd say Vancouver and maybe the whole British Columbia/Pacific Coastline becomes US Territory, with a low-burning insurgency of Canadians fighting back for years and maybe decades to come.
     
    Ameck16 and Whiteshore like this.
  4. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    By 1914 US population was 99.000.000 , and Canadian 7.000.000 . US can just flood Canada with their settlers...
     
    NAF, Vendaval, Adamant and 12 others like this.
  5. Teiresias Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2014
    Why, in the event of losing territory to the British, would the US be willing to spend decades pursuing vengeance against Britain? After all, the US helped Panama become independent from Columbia, and Columbia didn't do that. They also helped Texas and California sexed from Mexico - a much larger proportion of Mexico than Maine is of the US - and Mexico didn’t do that either.
     
    Blue cat, Laqueesha and Whiteshore like this.
  6. Saint_007 The King Of Nothing

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Oh definitely. Plus, the US was still the bigger destination for immigrants, so they can keep filling in space.

    We're still talking about Canada here. It's massive, hard to police and easy to smuggle things through. And with a population formerly allowed to use guns, you have a recipe for long-lasting, well-armed insurgency. The USA won't take all of it, because... well, why would they? They'll just take the choice bits, put the rest under a puppet state or two, then keep the minimum of force needed to keep the peace.
    They still remember the lost territory, and unlike the US in this scenario, they didn't have the ability to do anything about it.
     
    Ran, Alternator, Gukpard and 2 others like this.
  7. metalinvader665 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Tennessee, North American Union
    It would take a smarter German leadership and one which would be content with some agreement with the US where they divide up the world together, unlike OTL where Germany liked to push their luck with the Monroe Doctrine.

    But given this, Canada is likely defeated by the end of 1915, although insurgents will fight until the end of the war. Canada is almost completely indefensible--too much flat land with most major cities strung out along the border. The US will possess a strong Great Lakes fleet to deal with the Canadian heartland (perhaps in exchange for a smaller ocean fleet and of course a much bigger army). I don't see the British bothering to keep Canada in the war past there, even if they have won big against the US and German Navy--and given industrial capacity in the 1910s, the US Navy can be replaced in 3 years tops.

    A couple of Canadian raids sacking some random border town in Montana or North Dakota wouldn't be worth much in the grand scheme of things. Most of the border would be difficult to supply any substantial force. And any key targets would be policed by a US Army far, far better than the one in 1914.

    A giant chunk of the people there were either first/second generation immigrants from Europe/Asia or American citizens. No insurgency would last long. It would be as American as New Mexico in a generation.
     
    NAF, Deltax10, Ran and 8 others like this.
  8. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    It's about vengeance. US became Anglophobic nation, because they got smashed by brits 2 times for a century
     
  9. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    Also. CP would win here?
     
  10. Whiteshore Defender of Myrcella Baratheon

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2016
    Location:
    Philippines
    What about Quebec? Would the Americans be able to get Quebecois nationalists to collaborate with them?
     
  11. Lalli Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Nations not habit bring grudge decades after lost war. Check now OTL France and Germany in 21st century. Are they bitter enemies? No. they are almost best buddies. Even alliance between UK and France wasn't any problem despite that they have always been in war against each others. I don't believe that USA would bring grudge over small state five decades, at least not so hard that it would go war against other great power.
     
    Teiresias likes this.
  12. Kerney defender of low probability atls everywhere

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    Location:
    Earth
    They'd be better to let them go. Maybe even bribe them with some Francophone areas of NewBrunswick. I'd also remember that New Foundland/Labrador is not part of Canada yet, so I'd leave that to the British. Draw a line just north of Edmonton plus all of BC. Take everything South.

    Let the Brits keep Churchill as their primary port.
     
    Whiteshore likes this.
  13. DAv Middle Class... sorry

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Location:
    England
    To add to that, if the US does lean towards the Central Powers, the UK is going to make some really different choices in their diplomacy. Something along the lines of "Well, we don't really like the Russians, do we?"
     
    Dan1988, Teiresias and Ran like this.
  14. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    I said that US allied itself secretly, so no ramifications to European politics.
     
    Whiteshore likes this.
  15. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    France was salty over AL for 45 years circa this time. So why can't US?
     
    Ameck16, Braden Anderson and Ran like this.
  16. metalinvader665 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2011
    Location:
    Tennessee, North American Union
    That's a given in almost any scenario involving the US allied with the CP.

    If the US hates Britain, then the British will be very, very cautious. It isn't like OTL where they can be confident the US won't be able to do much for a year or so, no, this US has a big army which is much more organized and has a Great Lakes fleet (no demilitarization of the Lakes, that treaty gets ripped up decades ago TTL) which points a dagger right at Toronto and any other city on the Lakes.

    And once Canada is gone, the rest of the Empire is next.
     
    Dan1988, Deltax10, Teiresias and 3 others like this.
  17. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    Can you explain, what does this mean?
     
  18. SsgtC Ready to Call it a Day

    Joined:
    May 14, 2017
    Except this really doesn't work in real life. It's a great plot device for movies and TV, but in the real world, nations like the UK would find out about this treaty about an hour after it's signed. That's assuming they don't find out about it before it's signed.
     
    Dan1988, cpip, Janrey and 5 others like this.
  19. Undeadmuffin Muffin want to liiiive !

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2013
    Location:
    The ''evil'' Canada
    The UK could perfectly ''allow'' Canada to stay ''neutral'', you know, to limit damages as they litteraly have no way to save it ?
     
  20. StealthyMarat In the heavy thoughts. Gone Fishin'

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2017
    Location:
    Poltava, Ukraine
    Without Canadians UK wont hold front in France for long. 4 elite divisions is quite alot of soldiers.