Mr Unseens cmplexing senarioes case 1

This is a forum series I hope to do again, anyway case 1 is that Roosevelt is assassinated in 1933 and some isolationist takeover. Here's were it gets complex, without American intervention the Nazis are overpowered by a Anglo-French and Soviet alliance (surprise! the US didn't medal with the Munich Assembly like they did in our time line), would this sell, I'll tell you the aftermath of Germany's fall in my next post after I get a good responce.
 
I see. So how would changes in US domestic politics affect that? The US wasn't really any more active in European pre-war politics under Roosevelt than it would have been under an 'officially' isolationist President. Certainly, it's role in Munich was very small. And why would Britain completely change it's approach to Germany on this basis?
 
The um, um, okay, no american intervention in munich or pre-war europe leads to a Soviet invasion of Germany from poland (after they tookover their 1st), and leads to the collapse of nazism as a mjor threat. ps I don't think roosevelt's assassination (the actual main topic) would lead to a complete or utter axis victory like PHILIP K. DICK said it would.
 
The um, um, okay, no american intervention in munich or pre-war europe leads to a Soviet invasion of Germany from poland (after they tookover their 1st), and leads to the collapse of nazism as a mjor threat. ps I don't think roosevelt's assassination (the actual main topic) would lead to a complete or utter axis victory like PHILIP K. DICK said it would.

Why should the Soviets invade Poland.
Why should they invade Germany after that.
In OTL, they were frantically trying to set up a _defensive_ alliance and were afraid to be cornered into going to war alone.
So there's an isolationist US president out there on the other side of the ocean. Big news. Why should Stalin think about that twice and say, oh well, then I'll grab Poland on my own with this lousy army I just beheaded myself because I did not trust the generals.
 
You want a more isolationist US to stimulate more radical Anglo-French policy?

It would probably be possibly if you did enough research. A far more radical US disengagement from world affairs might provoke a change of policy in London and Paris if they felt more vulnerable at an earlier point.

Possibly if you change Japanese politics to remove that threat (and with a US withdrawal the British no longer need to compromise) the British might be more aggressive in the 35-38 period.

It is about the most convoluted and round about approach imaginable.
 
Top