Imperial German invasion of the USA

DougM

Donor
Well if you assume that all of the German high command is functional but otherwise complete idiots which is about the only reason they would go out of thier way to create another country that hates Germany when you already have England,France and Russia filling that vital roll. then it seams reasonable to believe that the entire world is so blind that they don’t notice the largest amphibious assault in history being put together and the sailing.
Add in that the US high command is apparently drinking lead paint and doesn’t believe that Germany would EVER be stupid enough to attack the US for ABSOLUTELY NO USEFUL REASON. And maybe Germany can sneak up on the East Coast.
Of course based on the abject stupidity of the German government in this world attacking the one power that was relatively neutral to Germany the perhaps it is reasonable to assume that the US government and military are just as dumb and therefore can not actually read and thus the telegrams warning about the invasion fleet are of no use.. ?
Now that I think about it the most logical thing in this whole concept is that the Germans actually pull off a sneak attack on the US, the logic behind that is that the US government and the Military command being reasonablely average in intelligence don’t believe that Germany is so galaticly stupid that they would attack the US for absolutely no good reason and thus even if they get telegrams they ignore them thinking they are being pranked. Heck you could probably get a full 24 of inactivity by the US military as it sits thier in complete disbelief that the Germans actually are attacking as the whole concept makes less then 0 sense.
I will repeat this indefinitely. In the early 1900s the US was just about the only Peer level country to Germany that DIDNT have a problem with them. Pretty much every single other “power” in the entire World (with the exception of AH Germany’s only ally) was either allied against them, actively opposed to them, had recently fought a war against them or just basically wanted something from them or wanted them to go away. The US on the other hand realy didn’t care less about Germany. (Yes this is over simplification).
So what does this thread suggest. That Germany attack the US. I will give it credit in that the US may very well be the only country that Germany could attack and have the attack be a surprise. But unless the point of this topic is an attempt to have the entire world (well the industrialized military capable powers anyway) ALL against Germany I just don’t see the point...
 

Driftless

Donor
okay, I'll take your word for it. Don't recall exactly how they got the troops over in "1901"...

Conroy had the Germans fake a general strike in the German coastal cities that shut down shipping in and out during the loading phase, and I believe that he also had those cities under martial law to impede any leaks.

*ahem...* Some level of handwavium involved there......;)
 
If we're getting them there and have a large stock of the Conroyvium isotope of Handwavium, why not have shipping magnate and Wilhelm's BFF, Albert Ballin place Hamburg-America liners at the disposal of the German Navy? Those suckers could keep up with warships and you could pack a lot of troops and materiel into them.
 
If we're getting them there and have a large stock of the Conroyvium isotope of Handwavium, why not have shipping magnate and Wilhelm's BFF, Albert Ballin place Hamburg-America liners at the disposal of the German Navy? Those suckers could keep up with warships and you could pack a lot of troops and materiel into them.
Nono, the issue is that the warships can’t keep up with the liners!

But for troopships you could send the battleships chugging over a few days earlier, the catch up with the liners. Then all you’d need is a major port to offload them in. The logical place being New York harbour, Boston or similar. Not sure what the coastal artillery is round those, but presumably you could manage some coup de main type thing. Ballsy move though, sailing in enough troops to capture a port on unarmed/unarmoured ships while hoping you’re not going to get an announcement from Admiral Akbar.

Apropos of nothing I’ve suddenly remembered the Russian airborne invasion of the US in Call of Duty, which was another memorable waitwhatnowhuhhow?? moment.
 
Nono, the issue is that the warships can’t keep up with the liners!

But for troopships you could send the battleships chugging over a few days earlier, the catch up with the liners. Then all you’d need is a major port to offload them in. The logical place being New York harbour, Boston or similar. Not sure what the coastal artillery is round those, but presumably you could manage some coup de main type thing. Ballsy move though, sailing in enough troops to capture a port on unarmed/unarmoured ships while hoping you’re not going to get an announcement from Admiral Akbar.

Apropos of nothing I’ve suddenly remembered the Russian airborne invasion of the US in Call of Duty, which was another memorable waitwhatnowhuhhow?? moment.
Maybe Hoboken, NJ. It was a port of call for Hamburg-America and there was a HAPAG facility there.
 
Nono, the issue is that the warships can’t keep up with the liners!

But for troopships you could send the battleships chugging over a few days earlier, the catch up with the liners. Then all you’d need is a major port to offload them in. The logical place being New York harbour, Boston or similar. Not sure what the coastal artillery is round those, but presumably you could manage some coup de main type thing. Ballsy move though, sailing in enough troops to capture a port on unarmed/unarmoured ships while hoping you’re not going to get an announcement from Admiral Akbar.

Apropos of nothing I’ve suddenly remembered the Russian airborne invasion of the US in Call of Duty, which was another memorable waitwhatnowhuhhow?? moment.

New York Harbor and Boston Harbor, historically, had the strongest coastal fortifications available to the US at the time (principally to avoid this scenario...) - to whit, fortification was renewed in 1895, and while not complete by 1898, had made a large chunk of progress by 1901.

To quote Wikipedia, as they're the easiest source I had...

Wikipedia said:
The initial armament of the forts was quite extensive. The Coast Defenses of Southern New York (CD Southern New York) were as follows: by the end of 1905 Fort Hancock on Sandy Hook, New Jersey, had two 15-inch and one 8-inch dynamite guns, eight 12-inch (305 mm) guns, sixteen 12-inch mortars, five 10-inch (254 mm) guns, four 6-inch (152 mm) guns, one 5-inch (127 mm) gun, and four 3-inch guns. Fort Hamilton in Brooklyn had six 12-inch guns, eight 12-inch mortars, seven 10-inch guns, fourteen 6-inch guns, two 4.72-inch guns, and four 3-inch guns. Fort Wadsworth on Staten Island had eight 12-inch guns, four 10-inch guns, five 8-inch (203 mm) guns, four 6-inch guns, two 4.72-inch guns, and fourteen 3-inch guns.[55]

Also by the end of 1905, the Coast Defenses of Eastern New York (CD Eastern New York) had at Fort Slocum on Davids' Island sixteen 12-inch mortars, two 6-inch guns, and two 5-inch guns. Fort Schuyler on Throgs Neck had two 12-inch guns, two 10-inch guns, two 5-inch guns, and two 3-inch guns. Fort Totten in Queens had eight 12-inch mortars, two 12-inch guns, two 10-inch guns, two 8-inch guns, two 5-inch guns, and six 3-inch guns.[55]

Generally, the heavy batteries were built first, followed by the 3-inch and then the 6-inch batteries.

With the exception to the rule mentioned below occuring during the Spanish-American war, where British rapid fire guns were rushed into service. Very few of those were in place by the end of the war, at which normal construction resumed. And, as mentioned in the article elsewhere, the first guns installed were the 12 inch guns and the 12 inch mortars, and the dynamite guns were also in place (but typically ineffective; these are the same guns as on Vesuvius)

And, of course, shore batteries are roughly thrice as effective as a ship batter (stabler foundation/pre-plotted firing points) so... Take that into account as well.
 
So who would actually win if it came to an all out war between Russia, the USA and France Entente vs Allies Germany, UK, Italy, Japan and AH in this time period?

Where would the non-Great Powers fall, Ottomans?

Could the USA keep France and Russia in it? If France and Russia go down I don't see how the USA can stand against the world in 1900. Isn't there a thread about the point when the USA can survive to eventually beat everyone?

I posted a scenario that devolved into that, but the answer is: it depends on where the fighting starts. The one assumption I make is that, to bring Britain on board, the PoD must have been far enough back that the US Army will have been beefed up somewhat - IOTL the friendship with Britain meant that there was no need for a large army, but ITTL the need is obvious.

My scenario had Germany + Britain (+Japan, brought in as a distraction) attack the United States first, and then France + Russia jump on Germany and its continental allies, Austria-Hungary + Italy, once the German army was tied up elsewhere. In that scenario, the Allies are fucked; the Germans proved they can beat France and Russia in WW1 (and here they also have Italy and Britain!), but not with their army heavily committed overseas.

The border between France and Italy lends itself to easy defense, and with the Royal Navy already busy keeping the US Navy in port (the German invasion force requires constant supply by sea) the French can keep their coasts safe-enough, so they can steamroll into Germany. The Russians, given a chance to mobilize, can bury the German and AH fronts in troops - and the Germans don't have the manpower available to reinforce the front heavily. The British are stuck either rescuing their continental allies or saving Canada; either way, the *Entente is going to see some immediate gains.

If the British commit to the defense of Canada, then combined with the German troops already present, they should be able to hold on just fine; the Americans should be able to handle the invasion just fine, but beating it back and launching their own will require significant mobilization, and that takes time. Without British help in Europe, though, the Entente is going to have a field day.

If the British decide to sacrifice Canada and prevent the French and Russians from rampaging through Europe, the Americans have an easy time winning their front and the British voters will go apeshit. Depending on how many German troops can be extracted, Europe may go pretty well for the Allies, but the United States is going to start rush-building the biggest, baddest fleet it can and that's an existential threat to Britain; now denied any staging grounds, the British can't really do much about it, either.

If the French and Russians take their shot before Germany commits, though? They lose, badly and quickly: there's just too many armies facing them, and the US Navy needs time to build up before the Americans can do more than take Canada as a bargaining chip.
 
If the French and Russians take their shot before Germany commits, though? They lose, badly and quickly: there's just too many armies facing them, and the US Navy needs time to build up before the Americans can do more than take Canada as a bargaining chip.

And, in the end, there's not much they would need to bargain for. If the US can take Canada, then the next target would be the Caribbean, and there's a decent chance the US could take parts of it - especially as the US needs to ensure that the Anglo-Germans have nowhere to stage another attack. Enough ships might be spared...

But then again, A US that has been perenially opposed to Britain to the point that it actually maintains a large army to swamp Canada means that it actually would have a Navy being rebuilt earlier to a larger scale - heck, if the army is that much larger because enmity is so high as to be noted like that (in a US where keeping a standing army was very unusual... If the British are that threatening to provoke a standing army, as you state the need is obvious, then they are certainly threatening enough to provoke a naval expansion).

After all, the best way to fight Britain is the same by fighting any other European Nation - to prevent them from attacking the mainland by trying to defeat them at sea. So, in the end, it's not a case of Britain+Germany vs a US that is roughly similar to Germany, but it'd be a Britain+Germany vs a US that has a Navy comparable to Britain, as Britain is the one opponent most able to damage the US. At the very least, they'd have invested even more into coastal fortifications and defense boats (i.e., monitors, torpedo boats, subs) as the cheap way to get more and more guns to defend against coastal invasion forces.

I get your point, but at the same time, why would the US increase one and not increase the other? We're not talking about a war scare that suddenly erupts - we're talking about a US with much worse relations with Britain that one side commits to fielding an expanded army and the other commits to finding an ally for the express purpose of invading the United States - this is a systematic change in diplomacy that would not erupt overnight, or even within a year, but would be a long, drawn out change.

In the end, the US doesn't have to bargain for anything except maybe the Philippines (and its value would probably be less than all of Canada to the US), and France and Russia are cobelligerent, not allies. So if the US takes Canada, and Germany walks all over Europe while Britain helps it establish MittelEuropa... Well, congrats to Britain there!

-

My question is... what happens if Germany tries to launch its surprise attack against the US, and the US find sout about it as they're setting sail. The US rapidly brings its forces to bear, but it concentrates its fleet to avoid being picked off in detail, and centrally locates it on the East Coast in order to rapidly react to wherever the Germans land.

There are two scenarios from there: the Germans try to take a major harbor and attempt to fight off the fortifications before landing troops, or they try to go for a lesser harbor where there's less resistance. In the former case, if it's one of the major harbors, the German fleet engages with coastal fortifications - if it's just Fort Hancock alone, they have equivalent numbers of guns to just over half the German predreads (8x3=24 effective vs 46 of the 13 predreads the Germans have). That's not counting the 16 mortars, the 10inch guns, etc... As such, a duel against that would go horrible for the Germans, with the only hope being that they land sufficient forces under fire to make up for the guaranteed loss of multiple ships.

I say loss as, if a ship is damaged even moderately, there is nowhere to repair it whatsoever. Any ship damaged off the East Coast is 100% an effective loss, as it can't make it back to Germany. While, in the same case, the US fleet can still be towed back to one of numerous safe havens for repair if necessary.

Now, if they try to attack a softer target, they might be able to make landfall but then have to march overland to secure better harbor facilities. The US has had a week or so to try and pull together all of the ground forces it can to repell troops - and all they have to do is stall as the US continues to mobilize what it can.

Simultaneously, the US Fleet will attempt to engage the German Fleet as a whole. By this point, they've either been damaged by coastal artillery or have had to act as artillery batteries for those on land and are drawn in towards the coast. So, in the latter case, the duel might be equitable (assuming Germany sent the majority of its fleet) but they can't afford any losses; any US ships damaged retreat, while the Germans don't have the option. And, the important target, the transports, have either unloaded and have left, or are unloading and are vulnerable, or have unloaded and are waiting for a port to recoal, and are still vulnerable.

So, eventually, the German fleet is whittled away until they are forced to retreat, as otherwise they'd lose to many units as any casualty is nonrecoverable so far from home waters (let's hope the US doesn't figure out to do nighttime raids with torpedo boats, either... otherwise it'll be messy). But, in the end, you have the US having driven off the German fleet, and the German Expeditionary force remains there on land, stuck and unable to resupply itself.

In the end, the Germans will have to surrender, and there is no way to scrounge together a second wave. There might be some battles in the Pacific - the US does have forces in the Philippines, but I don't think either side will be taking more than potshots at each other while the Kaiser is sending the majority of the force straight at the Eastern Seaboard.

All that being said, what are the terms for the US with a German army surrendered, its navy likely battered but better off than the Germans, and the war at a lull before either side tries to gear up for another round or for campaigns in the Pacific?
 

DougM

Donor
So if we pretend they can get there The we can imagine they stand a chance? Or I. Other words this is basically all but ASB levels of German wank.
And yet even with this level of over the top suggestions no one has yet been able to come up with evena vague reason the Germans would actually DO this.
And the idea that Germany and England would join forces is so rediculus that it isn’t even funny.

What’s next to be added to get the desired result p? Japan and Russia and China combine to launch am invasion through Alaska so as to help England and Canada and to open a second front on the west?
 
The reality is that while this idea might make an entertaining book for afternoon reading, or not, an invasion by space aliens is less ASB than an invasion of the USA by Germany between 1900 and 1914, let alone said invasion accomplishing anything positive for Germany.
 
The goal of the invasion was simply to occupy some cities in the Northeastern USA, such as New York, and force the USA to sign a treaty favourable to Germany.
 
The goal of the invasion was simply to occupy some cities in the Northeastern USA, such as New York, and force the USA to sign a treaty favourable to Germany.

Kaiser Wilhelm is probally stupid enough to think that.

Just take a city in a surprise attack and negiotiate for better terms, their a democracy their soft their weak.

And then America goes into a complete rage that takes him off guard.
 

DougM

Donor
So what possible outcome can you get from a treat that will justify the cost of the war in dollars (well Marks) resources, political good will and lives? You are trying one of the most difficult invasions in modern history. That IF successful will resulting in a land war on an enemy occupied land were the enemy army may be relatively small but the ENTIRE thing can be sent against your groups because they have no other commitments. They have a very capable train network to move said army and they are near thier supplies and you are about as far as you can get from your.
Add to this that you are doing this in the face of a relatively equal pier level Navy that will have the abto resupply and repair while you won’t and for good measure your smaller shorter range ships will have to stay home. Oh and don’t forget you have to protect first your transport ships and then your supply ships as well as your beach head. Oh and you probably should leave at least a bit of your fleet at home as a few of your neighbors are not realy all that fond of you.
So basically you are asking to get a good junk of your fleet destroyed as the enemy is free to maneuver and coordinate pretty much thier entire fleet against you while you have several things your fleet has to do at the same time.
By the way don’t forget the damage you took forcing a landing against those pesky shore batteries.

And once you get ashore you have to use thousands (if not 10s of thousand) of your soldiers just to keep controll of the City you decided to occupy.

Frankly the cost can not possibly be justified by ANY treaty you could ever get. And they way it looks you actually have a very good chance that the US Navy will do so much damage to your fleet and it’s troop ships that your army may well end up stranded. Given all the advantages you are giving the US Navy.
So in the end thier is a district chance that Germany may have to give away something (vs gain) at the peace table.
I mean when was the last time someone pulled off an unsupported invasion of another country across an ocean before this? It is not exactly common for a reason.

So you have to factor the possibility of losing into the question of the pay off being worth the cost.
So what are you asking for? New England? Because anything much less then that is not worth the possible cost of this.
 
Regardless of whether the German Empire managed to acquire Greenland and Iceland from Denmark beforehand or not in order to stage an attack against the USA, if the Germans were stupid enough to launch an attack or skirmish that quickly backfires against them (with the British turning a blind eye to an enraged America taking Greenland and Iceland) in the aftermath. Would this be enough to weaken the Germans had some version of WW1 later occurred to get them to accept unconditional surrender, thereby nipping the Stab-in-the-back myth in the bud?
 
Well it would conclusively prove that Germany was an irrational actor prone to mad-dog acts of aggression so quite possibly all the neighbors get together, carve up the map of Germany and then launch a coalition war of pre-emptive self-defense.
At the very least I can’t see both Austro-Hungary both getting their OTL blank cheque AND deciding to cash it in (who wants Mad Willy guarding their back in a war?).
Most likely the Army just decide that Willy and the rest of the politicians need to calm the fuck down and refuse to involve themselves in any foreign dramas. Although conceivably they could go the other way in full-on IJA “Imperial Glory or Glorious Death” mode which would be exciting for the neighbourhood.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
So what possible outcome can you get from a treat that will justify the cost of the war in dollars (well Marks) resources, political good will and lives? You are trying one of the most difficult invasions in modern history. That IF successful will resulting in a land war on an enemy occupied land were the enemy army may be relatively small but the ENTIRE thing can be sent against your groups because they have no other commitments. They have a very capable train network to move said army and they are near thier supplies and you are about as far as you can get from your.
Add to this that you are doing this in the face of a relatively equal pier level Navy that will have the abto resupply and repair while you won’t and for good measure your smaller shorter range ships will have to stay home. Oh and don’t forget you have to protect first your transport ships and then your supply ships as well as your beach head. Oh and you probably should leave at least a bit of your fleet at home as a few of your neighbors are not realy all that fond of you.
So basically you are asking to get a good junk of your fleet destroyed as the enemy is free to maneuver and coordinate pretty much thier entire fleet against you while you have several things your fleet has to do at the same time.
By the way don’t forget the damage you took forcing a landing against those pesky shore batteries.

And once you get ashore you have to use thousands (if not 10s of thousand) of your soldiers just to keep controll of the City you decided to occupy.

Frankly the cost can not possibly be justified by ANY treaty you could ever get. And they way it looks you actually have a very good chance that the US Navy will do so much damage to your fleet and it’s troop ships that your army may well end up stranded. Given all the advantages you are giving the US Navy.
So in the end thier is a district chance that Germany may have to give away something (vs gain) at the peace table.
I mean when was the last time someone pulled off an unsupported invasion of another country across an ocean before this? It is not exactly common for a reason.

So you have to factor the possibility of losing into the question of the pay off being worth the cost.
So what are you asking for? New England? Because anything much less then that is not worth the possible cost of this.

I agree with all of the above, except for what Germany would seek from imposing a peace on a war-weary US that wanted several hundreds of thousands of its citizens out from under foreign occupation.

Yes, I know the US wouldn't make any such peace, and in the extremely unlikely event the Germans captured the entire eastern seaboard, would fall back to Chicago & St. Louis and fight back from there. But how else will the Kaiser win? The Germans - if they believed in what they were planning - knew that conquering the USA was physically impossible.

In return for returning New York, or Boston, of Philadelphia etc. they would expect to receive some (if not all) of the American's recent gains from Spain. Even they knew a long-term lodgement in North America would only lead to a vengeful US Army storming back from the Mid West in numbers that would swamp any Imperial garrison.

Assume they thought that, having bested the USN (which of course they have already done, otherwise how did they "win" the Eastern seaboard in the first place) the Kaiser's navy would be perfectly capable of protecting the Philippines, if not Puerto Rico.

We all know that, even if the Germans were able to triumph in their operations, the Americans would never accept any such deal, and even if someone craven enough to surrender was found, the US would never cease planning for the next round, and they would find plenty of willing allies with their own reasons for clipping the Kaiser's wings.

IMHO even if the Kaiser dreamed of inflicting humiliation on the USA, his professional staff possibly regarded this as a planning exercise with no serious intent on following through. After all, the German General Staff was not totally composed of idiots & fawning flunkies, and they must have been able to spot the huge flaws in even the base assumptions on which Plan III was predicated.
 

DougM

Donor
The whole point is is just dumb, In 1900-1914 time frame Germany had a LOT of actual enemies or at least not very friendly rivals. The obvious being France Russia and England. You know the three that it eventually would get into a pretty large kurfluffle with? But in this timeline the Kaiser is aperently mainlining lead based paint while eating lead paint cookies in order to decide that what his country realy needs is to ignore its current problems and to attack a country half way around the world that is larger in population, larger in domestic product and has as big a Navy as Germany has. Oh and is also the largest most powerful country in the world at that time that was not already lining up against Germany (other then Germany’s alies)

in an alternate 1902....
So the Kaiser finishes his Sherwin Williams Milk Shake one afternoon and looks at his command staff and says “You know what we need? We need a place in the sun. And I think PortaRicco and the Philippine islands are the Perfect place for us. Nice and distant from Germany so our battle fleet that is already smaller then England’s can go on cruises and stations ships at the remote locations and guarantee that if we ever do get in a conflict with England that the fleet will be divided up and smaller so that England can crush it in pieces.”
The general staff then politely points out that these territories belong to the US.
In reply the the Kaiser says “Yes for now, but after we spend two years building up transportation for our troops and supplies we will launch a sneak attack on Boston and New York, And while 50,000 of our soldiers are acting as police in these two large cities our navy or at least whatever is left after fighting the shore batteries, will lay in ambush and destroy its near equal the US Navy in such as grand manor that we will still have more then enough Navy to protect the beach heads protect the supply convoys going and coming and of course still have enough nave to protect all the things that the Germany Navy currently protects. You know this unimportant things like say... Germany.. That shouldn’t take much it is not like one of our neighbors is LOOKING for an excuse/ opritunity to take back territory we took from them or anything “
One of the chiefs of staff looks up and in a soft voice (well for a German) says “But highness the US is friendly to us. They have fought two wars with England and are a large source for natural resources and have a large ethnicly German population, why would we want to add them to the large list of countries that don’t like us?”
The Kaiser looks at him and while reaching for a lead paint coated Oreo say “because we are German! And vat ve need most is another Enemy! We do best with lots and lots of enemies! Besides don’t you know that the best way to make life long friends is to fight them? You know how two school boys will get into a big fight on the playground and after the fight they will become best friends forever. BFFs for short. See I am so smart I invent new abriviation! Besides the Army needs practice and what better practice then to fight a country that can’t directly attack Germany!”
“But sire what about France?”
“What about them? It is not like they have any reason to dislike us and join in on the US’s side. France would never join the US to fight against a fellow European nation! And you know my family in England and Russia would never sude against me. I was always grandmas favorite “

After the Kaiser leaves the Generals and Admirils sit looking at each other to dumb struck to say anything until one General from Bavaria looks down at the table and says quietly “You know a while back we had a king that had lost touch with reality. He sat around all day listening to Wagner and designing ever more elaborate fantasy castles. I think I am beginning to miss him...}
A short rotund Admiril as “What happened to him?”
“We found a doctor to declare him insane and then sent home to a home to get cured”
“What happened when he got cured?”
“Oh, he didn’t he accidentally drowned a few days latter, sadly the doctor had to, Er I mean he drowned too”
“Humm, I think I know a couple Doctors I could do without...”

And so the Republic of Germany was born in the Fall of 1902 after the unfortunate Kaiser Wilhelm the “mad” accidentally fell from the 10 story window of the hospital he had been committed to the week before. Oddly enough all 7 Doctors that signed the commitment papers were struggling with him at the time to pull him away from the window but they all managed to fall out with him. One of them even took 20 minutes of holding onto the window ledge before he fell.
 

Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
FWIW in Conroy's book IIRC the German fleet commander had a stroke, several generals & field marshals were captured / sniped, Tirpitz was sacked & on the verge of a heart attack, while Wilhelm's imperial crown was slipping.

So, that all worked out well, didn't it :biggrin:
 
Top