Nationalist/Fascist America vs The World

[British Republic]

This is true, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't try. Canada will fight tooth and nail to protect their territory and there is no way that Britain itself and the other Dominions will not send assistance. And even if they cannot ultimately prevail, the Commonwealth forces would hold out for some time and make the conquest of Canada very, very costly for the Americans.

Canada and the UK would fight hard to stop the US invasion, but I doubt if the dominions would be that interested, considering the threat of American sanctions, the fact America does not pose a threat and lastly, due to WW2 still happening...

Also such a government would not consider the Canadians the enemy (since they mostly of European origin and are culturally close to Americans, at least the English-Speaking ones are), rather as “Americans living under British tyranny”, so the Americans can make clear that if they take control of Canada, they will treat the Canadians as as if where Americans (or European origin), so they will become US States as well as they take control, while it would be more authoritarian, I doubt if many would be willing to go against the United States.

The French Canadians might object to this, but since they would become a US State, they would be no worse than OTL in the 1930s, unless they where left-wing...

 

[British Republic]

How so? Why is invading and conquering Canada assumed to be the easist thing in the world, while conquering Soviet Russia is deemed to be ASB-level impossible? They're the two largest nations in the world, the terrain and conditions that any invasion force will have to overcome are virtually identical in Canada and Russia- but any invasion of Canada's assumed to be a piece of cake, while an invasion of Russia is deemed to be insurmountable and doomed to failure. Why is that? Sure, it's got about a ninth or an eighth of Soviet Russia's population at this stage, but even if the Americans launch their Canadian Barbarossa, and succeed in capturing all of the major population centres close to the border, will the Canadian people just roll over and bow down to their new hardcore fascist overlords, any more than the Soviets would have? Of course not. Just like the Soviets would have withdrawn to the Urals and continued to fight a guerilla campaign against the occupying Nazis, so the Canadians would withdraw to the Rockies and continue to fight their guerilla campaign against the 'Americanazis'. Canada's too big for such a regime to occupy fully, too late for the rebel 'Free Canadians' not to be able to operate in the vast wilderness with relative impunity. Saying that the population difference would this decisive is bogus- under that logic, without nuclear weapons, it'd be easy for China to invade and conquer the whole of Russia within a few weeks or less, annexing Russia as part of the Chinese empire permanently. The population difference between the two, and the sizes of the two nations relative to one another, are about the same...

Firstly I don't think invading the USSR is completely ASB (Eurofed's TLNF TL does this quite well), secondly the USSR is much bigger and has a much bigger army compared to Canada, remember also that the USSR had lend-lease, which I doubt Canada would ever have.

Also the Nationalists/Fascists are not “Hardline Fascist Overlords” or even Nazi's, also they would treat them as Americans and as US States, in other words as long as Canadians are willing to accept being part

Lastly, in this day and age without nukes, China would not find it hard to annex Siberia and the Russian Far East, especially if China's military continues to rise in comparison to Russia.

 

[British Republic]

You are wrong, the Soviet Union in WW2 made the largest army in world history, around 20 million men. Canada has no where near this kind of population or Industry. Both Canada and the Soviet Union were largely supplied by the American War machine. Not to forget that most of the population is within the U.S border.

I don't expect the AmericanNazis to be like the GermanNazis. Whats the real differnce between Candaains and Americans?

Canada would fall easy, and so would Mexico and Central America. Hell, the Latin states might welcome it. These countries will be better off in the long run.

If the government of the United States where similar (or even more progressive economically and socially), then I would agree that annexing the whole of the America's would be a very good thing, under these Nationalist-Fascists

 

[British Republic]

I think you mean, within 150 miles of the U.S border. And Canada had plenty of its own industry IOTL, along with the technical know-how to put a military industrial complex together. And that's without taking into account the massive migrations of refugees from the USA itself that'll boost their numbers before the USA's actually ready to invade, fleeing the new megalomaniacal hardcore fascist US regime. ITTL, Canada's going to ramp up its own military production to prepare for the oncoming onslaught from its openly aggressive and hostile neighbour, and the population difference between Canada and the USA's going to be far less- instead of being outnumbered ten to one, it'll probably be more like seven or even six to one. Still by a lot, but not by nearly as much.

The only people who would be leaving the US in this TL would be people who where left-wing, remember that they re not “hardcore fascists”, rather a nationalist-fascist government.

 

[British Republic]

Well, the US is screwed. Even at the peak of its power, in 1991, the US wasn't capable of taking on every other country in the world and winning. The US in the 1930s was barely capable of defeating Britain on its own.

But it has a chance if it has at least one ally. A US-USSR alliance could defeat the other Great Powers (Britain, France, Japan, Italy, Germany), with the two countries agreeing to stay out of each other's turf (America/Pacific and Europe, respectively). But even then, it would be incredibly difficult.

The United States does not need to take on every other country (they would be isolationist outside of the Americas), also most European and Asian nations would be having a war of their own thanks to Nazi Germany and Nationalist Japan (and their allies).

Canada's population is irrelevant. The key factor here is Britain, and more specifically the British Royal Navy, which was larger than the US Navy up until 1939-40.

The Royal Navy is also being used to fight Germany and Italy in Europe and Japan and their allies in Asia, as well as defending Britain itself...

Again, you're forgetting Britain, and vastly overestimating the US Army. The USA wasn't the semi-invincible military juggernaut it is today back then. Invading Canada is well within the capability of the US Army, even in its relatively tiny 1930s incarnation, mainly because all major Canadian population centers are so close to the US border. But Mexico and Central America would be a bitch to conquer. Imagine Vietnam, only with three times as many people, zero local support, and 1930s technology instead of 1960s.

The US Army would be around the size it was in the peak of WW2, it should not find it too hard to annex Canada, Cuba and the Bahamas at least, Mexico, Central America and the rest of the Caribbean would be harder, but still doable (especially if they co-opt the European groin and Mixed-Race elements of their populations, that would be Phase 1 of their plans to dominate the America's

HELL NO. Why on earth would they welcome being conquered by a bunch of racist gringos who don't even speak Spanish/Portuguese? And them "being better off in the long run" is highly debatable. Those areas would have been American puppet states, and wouldn't have had access to federal funds for things like infrastructure and education.

This American Government would not the people of European or Mixed-Race origin badly, for the people of African and Asian origin, more or less as they did in OTL at the time (as second class citizens)

 

[British Republic]

Sure, it didn't stop the Nazis- but they didn't hold the peace afterwards. So while such a US-USSR Pact may be formed to divide the Japanese Empire between them, it's almost certainly going to break down into all-out war between the two before their alliance manages to defeat the rest of the world.

I am talking about within the USA (and later in the whole of the Americas), outside the America's, the United States Government would simply not care since they are isolationist, so they would stay out of WW2 unless the Japanese attacked them as they did in OTL.

That is one of the reasons why they want to take control the America's, to “Prevent outside power from gaining influence and control on America's front and back yards”

 

[British Republic]

All-out war doesn't have to happen, though. A Cold War is completely possible. With the US as the dominant naval power, and the USSR as the dominant land power, neither can really touch the other, especially if they both have nuclear weapons by the end of the war (which seems likely. Even a hyper-racist US would probably have some version of the Manhattan Project).

A Cold War could be likely, however this Nationalist-Fascist Government not going to be”hardline” Fascist like Germany

 

[British Republic]

Surely trying to push its way through Central and South America would be a logistical nightmare? (made even worse by interference from the French and British navy)

The French and British Navies are going to be busy in WW2 in Europe and Asia...

 

[British Republic]

As for Latin America, I am skeptical that the US could take and hold it as long as all they seem to be interested in is the American version of lebensraum. For the record, why would an American Nationalist state even invade Latin America? I can see Canada to secure oil, but what is in Latin America that we don't have in the US? I can't see space being an issue, not in the 1930s (not even today). Sure, Latin America has some resources, but as far as I know nothing we couldn't without. And invading for the sole purpose of American destiny doesn't really make all that sense either. Rather, I can see an American nationalist state conquering Canada and then going uber-isolationist, as far as building a wall on the southern border (not a fence, mind you, a legitimate Berlin-style wall).

I doubt if South America would become part of the United States itself, rather part of a sort of “American Co-Prosperity Sphere” (ACPS), basically they are economically tied to the United States (a economic/customs union inn other words) and maybe a defence alliance as well, also as long they don't ally with anyone outside the America's or try and “stab America in the back”, they can do what they want without interference from Washington.

The “Greater” United States on the other hand, would consist of the OTL USA + Canada, Mexico, Central America (including Panama and its Canal) and the Caribbean, it would also be isolationist and neutral when it comes to affairs outside the Americas, that unless any nation is willing to attack it...

If this “Greater” USA has the living standards as did OTL Post-War USA, would its oil needs be met by its own reserves and of South America, or would they need to import oil outside the Americas?

 

[British Republic]

So. bearing in mind that we're talking about a hardcore racial supremacist fascist USA vs the World, let's answer the OP's questions.

It is meant to be a nationalist and fascist, is no more racist than US Governments at this time...

Huge. America isn't the land of the free any more, so immigrants start favouring other destinations. In turn, the USA's economic recovery takes longer, and only gets resolved Nazi Germany-style, through massive loans and by ramping up military production to unsustainable levels.

Was it not the case that migration what already quite limited at this time, as well as the fact most of them came from Europe?

Some of them? Certainly, at some stage. In the long run? None.

Well personally I fell it is possible as I have stated it

The rest of the free world, certainly. The Soviets, because of the Americans' anti-communist policy. Japan and China, because of the Americans' assertion that Asians are a primitive and inferior 'lesser race'. Nazi Germany, because of the USA's declared status as a semi-Jewish state. Anyone left over?

Would they not be fighting WW2 in Europe, Asia and Africa at this time, this ATL America is not going to care about affairs outside the America's, thus it poses no threat to them...

Also there is no way any invasion of the East Coast of America by Nazi Germany is going to succeed, nor would they be able to thanks to WW2...

 

[British Republic]

1920s and 30s you say

And they just attacked the British Empire by invading Canada?

Ohhh dear

Well as other posters have mentioned the US was a great merchant nation and would suffer under a blockade.

Also given the number of peoples in the US who would be opposed to such a government (depending on the POD of course) it would I imagine be relatively easy to set-up a very comprehensive intelligence network - especially as it is English speaking.

Like the War of 1812 Merchant Fleets would suffer and like 1812 in the end the US will need another new White House

That same British Empire is fighting Nazi Germany in Europe and Africa as well Japan in Asia and the Pacific, all the time with Lend Lease, besides support from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa is far from guaranteed, let alone India.

Sanctions would also impact the nations who do them at this time of economic weakness, also this government would have been democratically elected (they are American Nationalists after all which claim to be the successors of the Founding Fathers), however a intel network could be established by the British, however they already have the Germans and Japanese to deal with...

I cannot see any other nation doing it however, WW2 and the fact America is not interested in WW2 would prevent it...

 

[British Republic]

Um no, Canada was a major exporter of weapons and machines during WWII, and still maintained the most mechanised army in the war.

I do seriously doubt that Canada would actively last more than a couple months, unless the US decides to launch a two front war, but the partisan activities in Canada and Latin America would seriously drain the US. Especially when the Blacks and other minorities in the US probably won't be sitting happily.

Firstly American's military would be around the size it was at the peak of WW2

Also such a government would not consider the Canadians the enemy (since they mostly of European origin and are culturally close to Americans, at least the English-Speaking ones are), rather as “Americans living under British tyranny”, so the Americans can make clear that if they take control of Canada, they will treat the Canadians as as if where Americans (or European origin), so they will become US States as well as they take control, while it would be more authoritarian, I doubt if many would be willing to go against the United States.

The French Canadians might object to this, but since they would become a US State, they would be no worse than OTL in the 1930s, unless they where left-wing...

The only potential partisans are socialists and Communists from America and Canada, also since discrimination of Non-Whites will be the same as OTL, would they join such movements unless they agreed with them politically.

All it would be done in phases, first Canada, Cuba and the Bahamas, then Mexico, Central America and the rest of the Caribbean and then Latin America.

The end result would be a “Greater” United States which would consist of the OTL USA + Canada, Mexico, Central America (including Panama and its Canal) and the Caribbean, it would also be isolationist and neutral when it comes to affairs outside the Americas, that unless any nation is willing to attack it...

South America would not become part of the United States itself, rather part of a sort of “American Co-Prosperity Sphere” (ACPS), basically they are economically tied to the United States (a economic/customs union inn other words) and maybe a defence alliance as well, also as long they don't ally with anyone outside the America's or try and “stab America in the back”, they can do what they want without interference from Washington.

 

[British Republic]

Actually, it wouldn't suffer as much as other nations would have. Remember, by the time WWII started in OTL the United States was about half the world's industrial potential in one country. It outweighed the British Empire, France, Nazi Germany, and the USSR (the next four countries) combined. The US was also the largest supplier of oil and other materials in the world. A war that sees the UK (the only European power that would both give a damn and have the means to fight a war in the Western Hemisphere)

To the OP:

The UK would oppose them, the nations of Central and South America would oppose them, and that is about it. Being anti-communist isn't going to draw the Soviets into the war, being friendly to Jews won't draw Germany into the war, being anti-Asian won't draw Japan into the war. Instead all three of those countries are going to be doing a little jig as their great enemies are forced to concentrate forces at the United States, then Germany will go about getting revenge on Europe for World War I, Japan will launch attacks against the European territories in southeast Asia. So long as the US doesn't start working outside the Western Hemisphere, why should any they get involved after all.

Though, why would the United States bother to invade South America, or even most of Central America for that matter?

I could see a fascist America taking northern Mexico for security reasons (stopping the raids that happened before the US joined OTL WWI for instance), maybe even Panama. I can see them invading Canada even, but why go farther? The United States needs no resources from them, they need no land (the two biggest excuses used by fascists OTL to expand), etc. They really get nothing by fighting this war. The most I could see is a falangist style nation, which would be primarily focused on internal affairs.

You make some good points, also Britain would also be fighting Germany, Japan and its allies in Europe, Asia and Africa, the USSR, Germany/Japan would be to busy fighting each other to care to much about America, as well as the fact the UK and the USSR would have no Lend-Lease to help their war efforts, plus America would stay out of the affairs of Europe, Asia and Africa.

As for why America wants to get involved in South America, well for economic reasons, for its resources and lastly to prevent outside powers from having power, control and influence in “America's back yard”, in other words a extreme version of the Monroe Doctrine.

The “Greater” United States would cover OTL USA, Canada, Central America (Including Panama) and the Caribbean (maybe Greenland as well), so the Darien Gap gap can be used as a “southern buffer zone”

To overall it is for natural resources, the economy and to be able to isolate itself from the rest of the world, for example by needing to import less oil (Brazil could also be a large source of Biofuel, more so than in OTL).

 

[British Republic]

Yeah, racist or not, I can't see the entire world being able to unite and defeat the United States. The RN would have to outproduce the USN and constantly fight it, while keeping the rest of the Empire manned and policed, which if the OSS has any teeth at all, it will be encouraging rebellion at every turn to make life that much harder. . Germany would be giddy at the fact that England is having to divert so much to fight the US. The Empire was already in decline by WW2 OTL, so fighting a much bigger nation, with Germany staying around as a viable threat, would just make matters worse.

Cutting ones losses might not be such a bad idea.

The OSS would certainly be at its WW2 strength, but it will only take action against Britain and its Empire if it tries to stop America annexing Canada and tries to get involved in any part of the America's, Japan and anyone else would face the same treatment if the former did Pearl Harbour or a similar attack on America and the latter also tried to get involved in any part of the America's.

Britain would also have no lend lease...

 

[British Republic]

What the US does is very important, as is exactly when.

Are we talking about not signing, or repudiating the Washington or London Naval Treaties?

Are we looking at a massive expanse of the Army?

A building programme of capital ships is going to trigger a similar response from Britain and Japan. That in turn will push KMT China, the USSR, France, and the Netherlands to expand their navies.

If there is a real prospect of confrontation with the British Empire, then there's a window in the period for a massive expansion of the USN's airship programme for maritime patrol (with parasite fighters) before Akron crashes.

A nationalist America will still have a China Lobby pushing for exploitation of China and an "open door" policy because the money for a military expansion has to come from somewhere. Increased (and harsher) exploitation of the Philippines is likely on the list as well, which will lead to a persistent guerilla war there.

Re: Canada - War Plan Red at one point called for a poison gas attack on Halifax, which if implemented will damage relations with most non-aligned powers to some extent. Note that Britain owes substantial debts to the US which will be suspended at this time, and then offset against claimed damages for US actions in Canada.

A Mexican intervention, a racial supremacist philosophy, and a naval build programme will push Argentina, Brazil, and Chile to continue their battleship race, probably buying in from Italian yards (since the British and French will likely be filling their own).

By the latter 30s, the US Navy would be the size it was the in the peak of WW2, however America would make clear it would not interfere outside the Americas as long as outside powers do not interfere in the affairs of the America's, secondly China, the USSR, France, Japan and the British Empire would be involved in WW2, none of which would have Lend Lease to help them.

Also could America come into agreement with Japan for open access to China (economically) in return for the acceptance of Japanese rule of East Asia? Otherwise America would likely do thing as OTL, the question is how will Tokyo react since a attack on Pearl Harbour would be even more counter-productive compared to OTL.

Since America would not care too much outside the America's (except economically to a certain extent), it would grant independence to the Philippines earlier than OTL, but retain strong economic ties and maintain some military bases as well.

 

[GarethC]

By the latter 30s, the US Navy would be the size it was the in the peak of WW2, however America would make clear it would not interfere outside the Americas as long as outside powers do not interfere in the affairs of the America's, secondly China, the USSR, France, Japan and the British Empire would be involved in WW2, none of which would have Lend Lease to help them.

Who would believe the protestations of an American government which has already shown that its signature on the WNT isn't worth the paper it's printed on?

America shows it has an expansionist nationalist government espousing imperialism, which breaches its own treaty obligations to build a military capable of realizing that ambition. It would be a rash and stupid government that would not expect US hegemony to be rolled out over everything else that can be reached, when American internal stability is only guaranteed by totalitarian oppression.

Also could America come into agreement with Japan for open access to China (economically) in return for the acceptance of Japanese rule of East Asia? Otherwise America would likely do thing as OTL, the question is how will Tokyo react since a attack on Pearl Harbour would be even more counter-productive compared to OTL.

Lolno.
The Nationalist US and Imperial Japan will be in agreement - that when it comes to a foreign Chinese hegemon, like Highlander, there can be only one.

Since America would not care too much outside the America's (except economically to a certain extent), it would grant independence to the Philippines earlier than OTL, but retain strong economic ties and maintain some military bases as well.

Yeah, strong economic ties (we own your whole country, you non-white untermensch you) and military ones (who do you think will enforce said ownership)?

It won't give up the territory; it's too useful for a war with Japan.

 

[British Republic]

Who would believe the protestations of an American government which has already shown that its signature on the WNT isn't worth the paper it's printed on?

America shows it has an expansionist nationalist government espousing imperialism, which breaches its own treaty obligations to build a military capable of realizing that ambition. It would be a rash and stupid government that would not expect US hegemony to be rolled out over everything else that can be reached, when American internal stability is only guaranteed by totalitarian oppression.

However this ATL America would only be interested in affairs in the Americas, it would be isolationist in relation to affairs in Europe, Asia and Africa, really they just want economic acess...

Can Britain and its Empire build Armed Forces than that not only protect Britain and its Colonies in Europe, Asia and Africa from Germany, Japan and their allies and defend Canada and the British Carribean from America, all this without lend-lease?

Isolationism has a lot of tradition in the states and most often applied to Europe, Asia and Africa, the America's have been excluded from this...

The Nationalist US and Imperial Japan will be in agreement - that when it comes to a foreign Chinese hegemon, like Highlander, there can be only one.

Even if Tokyo allowed American acess to the Chinese economy?

Also if Pearl Habour was still done, would Tokyo see that it is even more stupid to attack the United States than OTL?

Yeah, strong economic ties (we own your whole country, you non-white untermensch you) and military ones (who do you think will enforce said ownership)?

It won't give up the territory; it's too useful for a war with Japan.

Why would America (a isolationist one) be interested in ruling regions in Asia that are very likely to remain Non-White for a very long time?

Like I said there is one rule for the America's and one rule for everyone else...

 

[wcv215]

snip

I don't think people have ignored it at all. In my last post I mentioned the likelihood of a naval arms race between Britain and the United Statss, but it would be a race Britain is doomed to lose. None of the other powers meanwhile are large or wealthy enough to be of consequence in the long-run. Even if both France and the Netherlands get involved (and the second is IMO doubtful) the US would still be able to,field a fleet that outnumbers them 2-1 without difficulty.

To the Indian army, they could raise those divisions, but that army cannot be fed, paid. Or supplied without an American government willing to advance loans and war materials through lend-lease. Remember, WWII in OTL left Britain exhausted and broke, if they have to pay a three million man army to fight a war on three fronts, at least one of which it then proceeds to lose, the British will have run out of steam by the end of the war.

snip

The US would have its hands full in the Americas. It would take a Nazi levels of stupid government to get involved in a war against Japan. Given that this seems to be a vanilla fascist group I doubt they would be that stupid.

 

[GarethC]

However this ATL America would only be interested in affairs in the Americas, it would be isolationist in relation to affairs in Europe, Asia and Africa, really they just want economic acess...

If America wants economic access to Europe, Asia, and Africa, it really doesn't seem isolationist at all.

Can Britain and its Empire build Armed Forces than that not only protect Britain and its Colonies in Europe, Asia and Africa from Germany, Japan and their allies and defend Canada and the British Carribean from America, all this without lend-lease?

Doubt it.

However, if it's the US that abrogates the WNT in the 20s, rather than Japan that doesn't sign LNT2 in 1936, then don't expect WWII in the same form in any way.

Even if Tokyo allowed American acess to the Chinese economy?

More that, if the US embargoed trade with China in the way that it did with Cuba after Castro took over, then Japan would consider that just possibly the US would not need curbstomping. A pullout from the Philippines which celebrated independence and did not maintain a military presence and economic dependency would probably cement that impression - in particular if it was clear that Manila would have no US aid in repelling a Japanese conquest.

Also if Pearl Habour was still done, would Tokyo see that it is even more stupid to attack the United States than OTL?

Ifs and butterflies.

If Japan is going to have to go to war with the US to ensure its ability to prosecute the war with China (e.g. no US trade embargo, no Japanese hard currency shortfall to purchase oil with), then Japanese doctrine demands a Mahanian decisive battle with the US Pacific Fleet. Japanese flawless victory will then have the US sue for peace and acknowledge Japanese awesomeness.

If Japan is going to have to destroy the US Pacific Fleet, then if and only if a jingoist US president forward-bases the battleships at PH instead of boringly and safely on the West Coast will there be a PH attack.

The things that will convince Japan of this sort of thing include: sending the China Lobby (inc. OTL SecWar Stimson) to the gulags; abandoning the Philippines, Guam, Wake, and Midway; pulling out of the foreign concessions in China; and not building a Two-Ocean Navy.

If Vinson gets a giant bucket of money to try to outbuild the RN, then the IJN will probably get the screaming heebie-jeebies about US intentions regardless though.

Why would America (a isolationist one) be interested in ruling regions in Asia that are very likely to remain Non-White for a very long time?

Like I said there is one rule for the America's and one rule for everyone else...

The short answer is cui bono. There is a lot of money to be made for the Americans who historically invested in the US's exploitation of China and the Philippines, and those rich and influential individuals will attempt to curry governmental favor and push US policy towards interventions in their areas of interest, to allow them to continue to make money (cf. Dole and the Banana Wars). Now, if the NatSocUS decides that that's not in keeping with National Socialist thought and has those pro-intervention folks all shot, then it's a more viable course to chart.

Timing however remains everything. When does the US change direction?

 

[British Republic]

If America wants economic access to Europe, Asia, and Africa, it really doesn't seem isolationist at all.

That would give then further reason not to pick sides in any major war in Europe, Asia and Africa...

Doubt it.

However, if it's the US that abrogates the WNT in the 20s, rather than Japan that doesn't sign LNT2 in 1936, then don't expect WWII in the same form in any way.

In this ATL, the Nationalists-Facists enter power in the mid-30s, they would pull out of the WNT once Japan does do (as it did in OTL) in 1936...

More that, if the US embargoed trade with China in the way that it did with Cuba after Castro took over, then Japan would consider that just possibly the US would not need curbstomping.

How extensive was the embargo against Japan by the US in OTL?

A pullout from the Philippines which celebrated independence and did not maintain a military presence and economic dependency would probably cement that impression - in particular if it was clear that Manila would have no US aid in repelling a Japanese conquest.

A Independent Phillipines will still have US Milltary bases and be strongly linked to the United States, however it would depend on if Manila agreed to it...

Ifs and butterflies.

If Japan is going to have to go to war with the US to ensure its ability to prosecute the war with China (e.g. no US trade embargo, no Japanese hard currency shortfall to purchase oil with), then Japanese doctrine demands a Mahanian decisive battle with the US Pacific Fleet. Japanese flawless victory will then have the US sue for peace and acknowledge Japanese awesomeness.

If Japan is going to have to destroy the US Pacific Fleet, then if and only if a jingoist US president forward-bases the battleships at PH instead of boringly and safely on the West Coast will there be a PH attack.

So basically, as long as there is a trade embargo by the United States, Japan is forced to attack the Pacific Fleet (which would be even bigger than OTL

The things that will convince Japan of this sort of thing include: sending the China Lobby (inc. OTL SecWar Stimson) to the gulags; abandoning the Philippines, Guam, Wake, and Midway; pulling out of the foreign concessions in China; and not building a Two-Ocean Navy.

I am not sure about Guam/Wake/Midway, but there will still be US Bases in the Phillpines and the Navy would be bigger than OTL (the size it was at its peak at WW2)...

If Vinson gets a giant bucket of money to try to outbuild the RN, then the IJN will probably get the screaming heebie-jeebies about US intentions regardless though.

He will, so Tokyo is not going to be happy...

The short answer is cui bono. There is a lot of money to be made for the Americans who historically invested in the US's exploitation of China and the Philippines, and those rich and influential individuals will attempt to curry governmental favor and push US policy towards interventions in their areas of interest, to allow them to continue to make money (cf. Dole and the Banana Wars). Now, if the NatSocUS decides that that's not in keeping with National Socialist thought and has those pro-intervention folks all shot, then it's a more viable course to chart.

This is a Nationalist-Facist (not Nazi, since I doubt such a movement would succed outside Germany and Austria) Governent interested in economic acess outside the America's, so there is a good chance it would pressure Tokyo for such acess to China would remain...

However unless Japan attacks them, the US would remain isolationist outside the America's

Timing however remains everything. When does the US change direction?

The Nationalist-Facists enter power in the mid-30s...