If Theodore Roosevelt wins in 1912 what year does he get the US to join WW1?

[Malone]

There would be little debate that if Teddy won the presidency again in 1912 he'd have done his best to get the US to join the war in Europe when it started. The question is when would he have been able to convince congress and the public to go along with him and what would have been the casus belli?

I'd assume by 1915 he'd have been more than raring to go (probably wanting to actually go to France himself). So it seems like he'd look to an event that year to make his call.

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

There would be little debate that if Teddy won the presidency again in 1912 he'd have done his best to get the US to join the war in Europe when it started. The question is when would he have been able to convince congress and the public to go along with him and what would have been the casus belli?

At the beginning he said Germany had no honorable choice but to defend Austria and Britain had no honorable choice but defend Belgium. It was the sinking of the Lusitania that made him call for American entry on the Entente side.

Assuming minimal butterflies when the Lusitania sinks in 1915, he'll be raring to go, but Congress and the American public won't, despite being outraged. He could probably get the Naval Act of 1916 passed a year earlier especially since he always a fan of the navy.

 

[Mikestone8]

Assuming minimal butterflies when the Lusitania sinks in 1915, he'll be raring to go, but Congress and the American public won't, despite being outraged. He could probably get the Naval Act of 1916 passed a year earlier especially since he always a fan of the navy.

Indeed. There's no way Congress (whether Republican or Democratic) will even consider declaring war unless/until the Germans declare USW against *American* ships. Entente ones (even with Americans aboard) wouldn't be enough. So the earliest possible date is Feb 1917 - just a couple of months earlier than OTL. Even this, of course, is contingent on TR getting a *fourth* term in 1916 - highly doubtful if he is suspected of wanting war.

Incidentally, the assumption of no change prior to the Lusitania is also unlikely. TR was on record condemning the sinking of the Gulflight a week before that of the Lusitania. Assuming that Berlin receives a scorching "Gulflight note" the Lusitania may well not get sunk at all.

 

[matzeskatze]

Good points on the Lusitania and all.
Another is that there is a huge difference between privat person Teddy and President Roosevelt. At least for me. Because as an privet person he could talk all he wanted with little consequence for the Nation. But as the President that would be very different.

At the beginning he said Germany had no honorable choice but to defend Austria and Britain had no honorable choice but defend Belgium. It was the sinking of the Lusitania that made him call for American entry on the Entente side.

Should this pan out, how would Teddy as President react to all the Entente actions regarding the Trade rights of Neutrals. As I understand it, Wilson was very lukewarm in definding his rights vs. the Entente and very vocal against Germany. So how would Roosevelt act and what consequences would that have for the CP and Entente?

 

[kham_coc]

Should this pan out, how would Teddy as President react to all the Entente actions regarding the Trade rights of Neutrals. As I understand it, Wilson was very lukewarm in definding his rights vs. the Entente and very vocal against Germany. So how would Roosevelt act and what consequences would that have for the CP and Entente?

This is where Roosevelts more jingoistic tendencies could have a major impact, because one of the motivating reasons for TR, was to give the US a seat at the table of the big boys - and while he almost certainly couldn't get the US into the war that he would have liked, those instincts would have seen him take a much firmer line with both the UK and Germany. Given that Germany backed down with USW otl (until they didn’t) and the UK escalated and escalated it would seem likely that this would favour the CP and hurt the Entente.

 

[Comte de Geneve]

I take a different stance. Given TR already had one Nobel for leading the negotiated peace to end one war, I believe he was the one world statesman with the gravitas to call for a negotiated settlement either of the July crisis or of the war when it was clearly becoming a stalemate at the end of 1914. Wilson had zero international gravitas in 1914 and in fact his Sec of State was William Jennings Bryan! Could TR pass up the ego boost of being the man who prevented or ended a Great Power War, plus the prestige that would give to the USA internationally. I believe such a move by President TR, in conjunction with other neutrals, was quite possible and certainly in keeping with TR's beliefs. Barring that he would not be able to induce the USA into an earlier entry on the entente side and there was that little matter of an election before USW and Zimmerman pushed the USA public to support war entry.

 

[piratedude]

This is where Roosevelts more jingoistic tendencies could have a major impact, because one of the motivating reasons for TR, was to give the US a seat at the table of the big boys - and while he almost certainly couldn't get the US into the war that he would have liked, those instincts would have seen him take a much firmer line with both the UK and Germany. Given that Germany backed down with USW otl (until they didn’t) and the UK escalated and escalated it would seem likely that this would favour the CP and hurt the Entente.

While i would agree the Entente would push back more, i don't think they would push too hard, because they recognized that they needed American industry badly

 

[ArtosStark]

This is where Roosevelts more jingoistic tendencies could have a major impact, because one of the motivating reasons for TR, was to give the US a seat at the table of the big boys - and while he almost certainly couldn't get the US into the war that he would have liked, those instincts would have seen him take a much firmer line with both the UK and Germany. Given that Germany backed down with USW otl (until they didn’t) and the UK escalated and escalated it would seem likely that this would favour the CP and hurt the Entente.

Have to disagree with this assessment. Britain in particular was highly aware of American opinion as the largest and most important neutral and tailored their policy around what they thought American opinion could put up with. They got away with it largely because they had a much better idea (through closer formal and informal ties and not being cut off by blockade) than Germany where that line was. The US might not like British policy but the British were able to make it acceptable enough to put up with it.

Such a policy would still be in place if TR being President made the American threshold lower. The Blockade was useful only as long as it did not jeopardize American imports. And the British were very cognizant of that.

 

[Garrison]

I think his best bet if Roosevelt actually wants to get into the war is to follow the same pattern as his namesake in WW2, that is a gradual ratcheting up of US Navy activity in the Atlantic to create a casus belli for war.

 

[ric350]

When the manifest did confirm that Lusitania was carrying shells, didn’t WJ Bryant resign after Wilson continued “on the path to war”? If TR was President, could Bryant have convinced him that Britain had put the lives of the Lusitania passengers at risk, and kept the US out?

ric350

 

[kham_coc]

Have to disagree with this assessment. Britain in particular was highly aware of American opinion as the largest and most important neutral and tailored their policy around what they thought American opinion could put up with. They got away with it largely because they had a much better idea (through closer formal and informal ties and not being cut off by blockade) than Germany where that line was. The US might not like British policy but the British were able to make it acceptable enough to put up with it.

Such a policy would still be in place if TR being President made the American threshold lower. The Blockade was useful only as long as it did not jeopardize American imports. And the British were very cognizant of that.

I don't disagree - I just think TR would have put up with a lot less than Wilson.
While this might have shaved a few months of the war dec (presuming otl) it also would have reduced the strength of the British blockade far more until the US joins.

 

[ArtosStark]

When the manifest did confirm that Lusitania was carrying shells, didn’t WJ Bryant resign after Wilson continued “on the path to war”? If TR was President, could Bryant have convinced him that Britain had put the lives of the Lusitania passengers at risk, and kept the US out?

ric350

The manifest showed small arms ammunition which would not be, and was not IOTL, considered sufficient justification for her sinking.

I don't disagree - I just think TR would have put up with a lot less than Wilson.
While this might have shaved a few months of the war dec (presuming otl) it also would have reduced the strength of the British blockade far more until the US joins.

Possibly, though I doubt much changes substantially.

 

[jlckansas]

I like the idea of TR trying to be peace maker before the war actually starts. But, I can also see there being a problem one of the European Powers decide to brush him aside, even if the others want to listen to him at least if not actually want to look at this in a serious manner. Imagine if the Kaiser and the UK decide that "Yes we will set down with President TR being the mediator" and France, Russia or Austro Hungary go against it and what would happen then?

 

[Mikestone8]

Should this pan out, how would Teddy as President react to all the Entente actions regarding the Trade rights of Neutrals. As I understand it, Wilson was very lukewarm in definding his rights vs. the Entente and very vocal against Germany. So how would Roosevelt act and what consequences would that have for the CP and Entente?

He was annoyed about the interception of mail from the US, and at least once suggested that itmight be carried on a battleship rather than a merchantman.

 

[piratedude]

I like the idea of TR trying to be peace maker before the war actually starts. But, I can also see there being a problem one of the European Powers decide to brush him aside, even if the others want to listen to him at least if not actually want to look at this in a serious manner. Imagine if the Kaiser and the UK decide that "Yes we will set down with President TR being the mediator" and France, Russia or Austro Hungary go against it and what would happen then?

He certainly wouldn't be able to convince A-H to not go to war with Serbia, and thus Russia too would move to nake war with Austria.

I think Teddy could convince Wilhelm to try to pump tbe breaks on the war more emphatically, but the military leaders will either wear him down with fear mongering over Russia or somehow provoke a Russian attack to bring them into the war. If nothing else, the outbreak of war showed how little control Wilhelm actually had over Germany, and itd be just that little more obvious with this TL

 

[marktaha]

When the manifest did confirm that Lusitania was carrying shells, didn’t WJ Bryant resign after Wilson continued “on the path to war”? If TR was President, could Bryant have convinced him that Britain had put the lives of the Lusitania passengers at risk, and kept the US out?

ric350

Bryan would hardly have been his Secretary of State. Did they know each other well?

 

[Hugh Third of Five]

I think his best bet if Roosevelt actually wants to get into the war is to follow the same pattern as his namesake in WW2, that is a gradual ratcheting up of US Navy activity in the Atlantic to create a casus belli for war.

I'm not sure Imperial Germany would be as stupid as Nazi Germany if that happened. They backed off in 1915 when Wilson said he would consider further USW to be "an unfriendly act," and even when they restarted it, avoiding the consequences of drawing America into the war directly was a major concern. Also Congress and the American public were willing to give FDR more leeway because of the fall of France.

I think Teddy could convince Wilhelm to try to pump tbe breaks on the war more emphatically

Teddy would not try to stop Germany from going to war against Russia or Serbia, since (as I said above) he's on the record saying they had no honorable choice except to defend Austria. The most you could get is him trying to stop Germany from invading Belgium or maybe trying to stop them from declaring war on France, although in the latter case, France would likely declare war on Germany anyways.

Have to disagree with this assessment. Britain in particular was highly aware of American opinion as the largest and most important neutral and tailored their policy around what they thought American opinion could put up with. They got away with it largely because they had a much better idea (through closer formal and informal ties and not being cut off by blockade) than Germany where that line was. The US might not like British policy but the British were able to make it acceptable enough to put up with it.

And the US was more willing to (grudgingly) tolerate the British blockade because the German one had an American body count.

 

[Garrison]

I'm not sure Imperial Germany would be as stupid as Nazi Germany if that happened. They backed off in 1915 when Wilson said he would consider further USW to be "an unfriendly act," and even when they restarted it, avoiding the consequences of drawing America into the war directly was a major concern. Also Congress and the American public were willing to give FDR more leeway because of the fall of France.

This is the country that thought the Zimmerman telegram was a good idea, on top of any number of other serious strategic/diplomatic mistakes, you will understand if I am sceptical about their stupidity level.

 

[rainsfall]

This is the country that thought the Zimmerman telegram was a good idea, on top of any number of other serious strategic/diplomatic mistakes, you will understand if I am sceptical about their stupidity level.

It would have been impossible for TR to enter the war before the advent of USW in 1917.

Putting aside the basic fact that Congress(dominated by Taftite Conservative Republicans hostile to his Progressive agenda) would not have agreed to declare war earlier than they did historically, the RNC delegates in 1916 explicitly warned that nominating TR that year may win the Progressive California, but would be tantamount to political suicide in the German-American-dominated Midwest that they needed for victory.

TR passing 1912 for 1916 would not have gotten him re-elected(or even re-nominated). A TR who won the 1912 GOP primary against Taft would not have been able to persuade a Taft-aligned Congress full of his alienated allies to declare war before 1917.

Congress declaring war over Lusitania is about as plausible as Congress declaring war over Panay. Which is, completely implausible.

 

[naraic]

Would TR tale FDR style steps such as declaring a neutrality patrol if he didn't join the war.