(Research for story) How would Woodrow Wilson and the US have reacted to a new war in Europe?

Starting in 1918, at the same time as World War I in which over 53,000 Americans perished, the United States and several other Allied nations were fighting in Siberia to rescue the Czechoslovak Legion and recover heavy weapons given to Russia, which were now in Bolshevik hands. But in April 1920, Woodrow Wilson had ordered most of the 5,000 American troops, who had been fighting under the Polar Bear Expedition, home, though some stayed until 1922.

In 1919, the United States had gone through the Red Scare. Marked by labour unrest and anarchist bombings, it was characterized by exaggerated rhetoric, illegal search and seizures, unwarranted arrests and detentions, and the deportation of several hundred suspected radicals and anarchists.

In August 1920, the Soviets almost crushed the Poles at the Battle of Warsaw, but thanks to a combination of Polish spies breaking Soviet encryption codes and Stalin disobeying orders, the Poles were able to repel the Soviets.

Now, had the Soviets won at Warsaw and conquered all of Poland, intervention by the European powers (Germany, Britain, etc) was guaranteed and a second European war would've started, but what about intervention by nations outside of Europe, especially the US? The US only intervened in World War I because the Germans were stupid enough to encourage a Mexican invasion of the United States. Immediately after US victory in World War I and due to the 1918 mid-term election, isolationist elements of the US government, represented by the Republicans, and society reasserted themselves, blocking the passage of the Treaty of Versailles and US membership in the League of Nations. So, I have a couple of questions

  1. Would Wilson have wanted to get involved in Europe again so soon after World War I?
  2. Would the American public have wanted the same thing?
  3. How does this impact society on the US home front?
  4. Would the US (or any other nation) had attempted to reopen the Allied intervention in the Russian Civil War?
 

Calbin

Banned
Wilson had a stroke in 1919, so I dont think he was in the condition to get into a major intervention in Russia
 
Now, had the Soviets won at Warsaw and conquered all of Poland, intervention by the European powers (Germany, Britain, etc) was guaranteed and a second European war would've started

It would have been hugely unpopular.

In Britain, dock workers refused to load arms being sent to Poland. And while the Germans would no doubt have been pleased to move back to their 1914 borders, were they in any shape to join a bigger war?
 
German support for Mexico was just the useful pretext for stirring outrage. The US joined because it had way more to lose from Entente loss (and to a lesser extent, to gain from their victory).

As others pointed, the climate turned to isolationism in the US - the Senate refused to join the League of Nations, there was no way they would even remotely think of joining any other European conflict.
 
Last edited:
Wilson had a stroke in 1919, so I dont think he was in the condition to get into a major intervention in Russia

His wife ran the Country in his name from October of 1919 until March of 1921. They never really let on that he was incapacitated. VP Marshall seemed to be cool with that.

tenor.gif

err-- Woman.

And it worked. She fired the Secretary of State when he wouldn't play ball
 
His wife ran the Country in his name from October of 1919 until March of 1921. They never really let on that he was incapacitated. VP Marshall seemed to be cool with that.

tenor.gif

err-- Woman.

And it worked. She fired the Secretary of State when he wouldn't play ball

She tries to drag the country into an unpopular war though... that's a bit more of an extreme move. People are going to want to see the President making his (presumably very good) argument as to why it's nessicery to send hundreds of thousands of doughboys to freeze their behinds off in Siberia, and somewhere along the line somebody in the Brass is going to crack. If nothing else, when Innaguration day pulls around and you need to pull a Weekend at Bernies...
 
His wife ran the Country in his name from October of 1919 until March of 1921. They never really let on that he was incapacitated. VP Marshall seemed to be cool with that.

As I understand it, Marshall was ready enough to assume Presidential duties if Wilson asked him to.

What he wouldn't do was stage a constitutional coup d'état by telling Wilson "You are unfit. I'm taking over." He considered that such a move would set a frightfully dangerous precedent. He probably also assumed that Wilson would either recover or die within a few weeks or months, either of which would settle matters. But even had he realised that the situation would last to March 1921, he would probably have viewed that as the lesser evil. After all, the next election was only about a year away, so in the end the situation would resolve itself, and the next POTUS would just inherit a bigger in-tray than usual.
 
If war was somehow declared between the United Kingdom and Soviet Russia, would these strikes be prosecutable under the Defence of the Realm Act?

There was no real like for communism in the UK, the Labour Party was enough for near all. King and country was still a big thing, plus many would support if of no other reason they had done it themselves and wouldn't what to let down the boys.
 
His wife ran the Country in his name from October of 1919 until March of 1921. They never really let on that he was incapacitated. VP Marshall seemed to be cool with that.

tenor.gif

err-- Woman.

And it worked. She fired the Secretary of State when he wouldn't play ball
The 19th amendment also passed during that time. One has to wonder if Mrs. Wilson had anything to do with that.
 
There was no real like for communism in the UK, the Labour Party was enough for near all. King and country was still a big thing, plus many would support if of no other reason they had done it themselves and wouldn't what to let down the boys.

Mind you, the mere possibility of a much smaller war (with Turkey) was enough to being Lloyd George down.

Iirc we also pulled out of Persia at about the same time. With the Great War over, most people wanted a rest, and even the smallest wars would run into pretty massive opposition.

This, imho, was what wrecked the Treaty of Versailles. Whatever its merits, it would take an effort to enforce, and people just weren't willing to make the effort.
 
She tries to drag the country into an unpopular war though... that's a bit more of an extreme move. People are going to want to see the President making his (presumably very good) argument as to why it's nessicery to send hundreds of thousands of doughboys to freeze their behinds off in Siberia, and somewhere along the line somebody in the Brass is going to crack. If nothing else, when Innaguration day pulls around and you need to pull a Weekend at Bernies...
I personally find it unlikely Edith Wilson would have dragged the country into such a war.
 
Top