Is Roosevelt staying out of WWI ASB?

Theodore Roosevelt decides to run as a Republican during the 1912 election alongside Wilson and Debs (Taft decides not to run) and wins the election. Assuming he is reelected in 1916 and his term encompasses the entirety of WWI, can I prevent Roosevelt entering the war through some other sort of distraction like a Mexican-American War or a Pacific War with the Japanese, or is it simply complete ASB?
 
Theodore Roosevelt decides to run as a Republican during the 1912 election alongside Wilson and Debs (Taft decides not to run) and wins the election. Assuming he is reelected in 1916 and his term encompasses the entirety of WWI, can I prevent Roosevelt entering the war through some other sort of distraction like a Mexican-American War or a Pacific War with the Japanese, or is it simply complete ASB?


It's ASB if the Germans start sinking US merchantmen in Feb/Mar 1917. No way will TR ever swallow that.

If having TR in the White House deters them from doing so, then it's possible.
 
It's ASB if the Germans start sinking US merchantmen in Feb/Mar 1917. No way will TR ever swallow that.

If having TR in the White House deters them from doing so, then it's possible.

You are aware that Wilson told the Germans this was unacceptable too right? Germany agreed to this at first but eventually thought that they could knock Britain out of the war as SOON AS POSSIBLE by the blockading of the British Isles and hoped the US wouldn't get involved.
 
It's ASB if the Germans start sinking US merchantmen in Feb/Mar 1917. No way will TR ever swallow that.

If having TR in the White House deters them from doing so, then it's possible.

I'm thinking that as a result of butterflies the Lusitania is never sunken and the Zimmermann Telegram is either never sent/never intercepted.
 
I'm thinking that as a result of butterflies the Lusitania is never sunken and the Zimmermann Telegram is either never sent/never intercepted.

No matter what if the Germans keep sinking ships soon another Lusitania will happen ... so IMHO yes is a bit of ASB, and IIRC the man was quite pro brit ...
 
I think TR would want to enter the war earlier than 1917. Though I think he would have had trouble selling it to the American people.
 
Even the reluctant Wilson declared war on Germany eventually. Germany's policies were just too absurdly confrontational in regards to America to keep her neutral, Germany would actually have to demonstrate to America that it was actually willing to accept American neutrality and not constantly connive behind their backs to undo them anyway. This would require intelligence and careful diplomacy on the part of ol' Kaiser Willie and his government but alas it did not exist.

Roosevelt would've taken ANYTHING that aroused public opinion enough as an excuse to do something he wanted to do anyway and declare war on Germany.

There's no way TR would've gone for a merciful Wilsonesque approach to the eventual peace either, Teddy might've been right up there with the French in terms of making Germany pay.
 
...and, TR was as great a warmonger as the nation has had. So, I do think it would take a space bat with drugs to keep him out.

Though, that does raise the interesting question of how long it'd take for him to get us IN. Would we last til 1915, even?

And would earlier entry improve Entente command, which IOTL wasted millions of lives by sending them dumb against the machine guns?
 
TR wasn't as Anglophilic as Wilson, who I think was one of, maybe the, biggest Anglophiles ever in the Oval Office (he preferred the parliamentary system to the Constitutional one), but TR was more of a warmonger.

President Bryan or La Fallette is what you want.
 
TR wasn't as Anglophilic as Wilson, who I think was one of, maybe the, biggest Anglophiles ever in the Oval Office (he preferred the parliamentary system to the Constitutional one), but TR was more of a warmonger.

President Bryan or La Fallette is what you want.

As I recall Wilson later recanted some of his more critical views of the US government system and such after his faith was restored in it.

But yes Wilson's anglophilia is quite fascinating, he has that British demeanor about him in a way.
 
Uhh... wasn't TR largely out of politics by this time??? I know he campaigned for some politicians in and around this time, and made big time speeches... but seemed to have largely given up on trying to become president again after the Bull-Moose incident.

And he had health problems.

*shrugs*
 
Uhh... wasn't TR largely out of politics by this time??? I know he campaigned for some politicians in and around this time, and made big time speeches... but seemed to have largely given up on trying to become president again after the Bull-Moose incident.

And he had health problems.

*shrugs*

Yeah, he crashed big time after his son died, but Teddy would still campaign to have things done (i.e. outspoken proponent of war with Germany) and people would listen. Also he did try and start a military unit for WWI a la the Rough Riders, Wilson shot him down.

But in response to the thread, yeah, like ol' Eleanor said, he was too much of a warmonger NOT to go to war at the drop of a hat, let alone the fact that he loved the British and would kill the Kaiser himself if he let him.
 
...and, TR was as great a warmonger as the nation has had. So, I do think it would take a space bat with drugs to keep him out.

Really? I don't recall him going to war with anyone during his Presidency.

Though, that does raise the interesting question of how long it'd take for him to get us IN. Would we last til 1915, even?

Depends on the Germans. If they call off USW in response to TR's Lusitania notes (which will be a lot more belligerant than Wilson's) and don't try to renew it in early 1916 (ie no Sussex) then it will probably take about the same time as OTL.

Once USW is redeclared in 1917, war will become inevitable. If the decision is announced Jan 31, as OTL, he probably declares war in Feb -though of course there is a slim possibility that with TR in the White House, the Germans may be deterred from doing it at all, and he remain neutral despite his Allied sympathies.

And would earlier entry improve Entente command, which IOTL wasted millions of lives by sending them dumb against the machine guns?

Not unless the AEF behaves a lot differently from OTL, when it failed to profit by the Allies' experience. Its officers threw it against machine guns every bit as prodigally as the Allies - and the Germans - had ever done.
 
TR wasn't as Anglophilic as Wilson, who I think was one of, maybe the, biggest Anglophiles ever in the Oval Office (he preferred the parliamentary system to the Constitutional one), but TR was more of a warmonger.

For TR as warmonger, see my previous message.

Re Wilson, he may have been an anglophile, but before all else he was a Wilsonophile. Afaics, for all the German provocations, his real reason for going to war was fear of being left out of the peace conference - because he had convinced himself that only he could get the peace right. Two years later, despite being clearly incapable of performing his duties, he would cling to office from a similar conviction that only he could get the League of Nations question right. In fact, it's not obvious that either the ToV or the 1919/20 LoN debate really benefited much from his involvement, but he'd got this vision of himself as the Indispensible Man.

President Bryan or La Fallette is what you want.

I don't really see how LaFollette could get in. The GOP would never nominate him. The only possible route would be the one that put TR in - becoming VP followed by his predecessor's death in office - but even that seems highly unlikely.

President Bryan is more of a possibility. What you need is something - illness, maybe? - to keep him out of the 1908 race. It won't make much immediate difference - whoever replaces him on the ticket will lose to Taft as he did - but without this third defeat, he is front-runner for the 1912 nomination, and with it the Presidency. Of course, he would need to be re-elected in 1916[1], but if his domestic policy (the decisive factor that year) is the same as Wilson's there is no obvious reason why he shouldn't be.

[1] Assuming there is a 1916 election at all. If the single term amendment goes through (Bryan won't block it as Wilson did) then the next election may not be until 1918.
 
Last edited:
You have to play your butterflies from the start - if TR wins in 1912, then assuming all else is equal by June 1914 you have him as president from the start of the war, and he is not going to react in the same ways that Wilson did. For a start he will have a different cabinet with a different Secretary of State, and of the Navy, and there will be different dynamics leading to decisions taken in OTL, or shelved in OTL, going differently here.

You can't just project TR onto the 1917 situation, or even project the 1917 situation with TR in charge onto the 1915 situation.

A TL on this would need to ask who TR has as his SoS, what amount of independence such a person has, what statements and positions he makes his own during the 1912-1914+ period, and how this has set things up by 1914

I think it highly possible that if TR takes a militarily robust position from the start of any Great War, then the OTL situation of German submarines sinking neutral shipping may never come to happen in the first place

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
The only two people who I think would've avoided the war would've been William Jennings Bryan or Bob LaFollette. Other than that, the war is going to happen.

Although, I kind of like the suggestion that TR scares Germany into submission, I doubt that'd be the case. Also, for as hawkish as TR was, he was remarkably peaceful as President. But I think TR would not tolerate any aggression against the U.S. Germany really forced the issue and I think TR would've fought at least a year earlier than Wilson.
 
Might he not reinstitute a European Squadron, which could use Spanish, or Italian, bases? It has a historical precedent in US presence in the Med in the first half of the 19th century, but I think that had died out by the 20th century. A strong force in European waters would be a statement of intent, and could lead to the imposition of neutrality patrols later on

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
The only two people who I think would've avoided the war would've been William Jennings Bryan or Bob LaFollette. Other than that, the war is going to happen.

Maybe Champ Clark as well, though I agree it's not 100% sure.

Although, I kind of like the suggestion that TR scares Germany into submission, I doubt that'd be the case. Also, for as hawkish as TR was, he was remarkably peaceful as President. But I think TR would not tolerate any aggression against the U.S. Germany really forced the issue and I think TR would've fought at least a year earlier than Wilson.

Germany backed down to Wilson in March 1916, and presumably would have backed down to TR (assuming that with him around the Sussex incident happens at all). After that, until the resumption of ASW in Feb 1917 America's quarrels were mostly with Britain rather than with Gerrmany.
 
Not unless the AEF behaves a lot differently from OTL, when it failed to profit by the Allies' experience. Its officers threw it against machine guns every bit as prodigally as the Allies - and the Germans - had ever done.

Pretty much, for political reasons we kept a separate army (mostly so we would be able to have a voice in the postwar peace) and we largely failed to deliver upon our promises to enter by the date promised (to the point where the French seriously considered making peace with Germany) and then promptly failed to really pay attention to anything that more experienced British and French officers told us. Gas in particular got a lot of our guys as they were new and inexperienced in that particular horror of the war.
 
Top