Total US neutrality during WWII: Effects in Europe?

I think people aren't really considering the butterflies this might have on the assumption the US declares neutrality before entering the war. This may have all kinds of things--Stalin might pull an Icebreaker and push into Germany first, or the USSR might adjust its production prior to the war. I'm leaning towards the notion that the war will last longer, but will result in a Soviet-dominated Europe--Barbarossa might do better than in OTL, but ultimately it will collapse once poor physical conditions, bad planning, and logistics problems set it as in OTL. Of course, the Soviets will have a hell of a tough fight pushing them back to Berlin...
 
Why on earth is everybody thinking that this is a USSR wank. If anything I could see them do worse, way worse.

IOTL they suffered over 20 million casualties which was a major demographic disaster and by 44-45 the Soviet steamroller was running out of men. By the the time Soviet forces entered Berlin, man power reserves were all but gone and their economy was shattered. In this situation the USSR is likely to suffer worse (Hitler can thank Stalin for the purges, without them Germany would've been defeated way sooner).

If America is totally neutral (as unlikely as that is) it is still likely to trade with the British but less so with the Soviets. Without Lend-Lease the bombing campaign against German cities will likely be less intensive, freeing up men from air-defence roles to fight (mostly on the eastern front). Without LL the USSR will have to send men back to the farms to produce food by '42-'43 and to the factories to make trucks and locomotives, decreasing tank production. I could see Italy going down but Britain making a slightly favourable peace due to financial problems (again, if there is no LL). The Nazis and communists will eventually bleed each other white. Hitler will have to face the fact that the USSR is too big to conquer. The Soviets could get anything from a peace on 1941-borders with minor corrections or a Brest-Litovsk peace V2.0 or even slightly worse, depending on who Stalin purges for his failures and how bad those failures are.

It shouldn't be left unsaid that Stalin will likely come back for a second round though.
 
It shouldn't be left unsaid that Stalin will likely come back for a second round though.
Quite so; any peace between Hitler and Stalin would be a tenuous thing that would be broken as soon as one side believes it has gained enoough of an advantage over the other to win a resumed war.

On the issue of US neutrality, like others have said the only way to keep the US completely neutral is some sort of massive internal problem that paralyzes US foreign policy. That's not exactly easy to do without setting up events that seem fairly ASB compared to OTL.
 
On the issue of US neutrality, like others have said the only way to keep the US completely neutral is some sort of massive internal problem that paralyzes US foreign policy. That's not exactly easy to do without setting up events that seem fairly ASB compared to OTL.

Unless one uses the cliché PoD involving the successful assassination of FDR in 1933. :rolleyes:
 

Deleted member 5719

I'm not sure about no D-day either. The RN would still control the channel, Canadians, West Africans and Brits could do the job nicely (in 1946).
 
lets see britsh army 50 divs 8 2nd AIF & 2 NZ, 20 ind dont for get britans not alone in this and maybe 16 candan divs could be raised and at lest 2 south african divs thats 98 from britan & empier so far add on any number from the rest off empier and you just may reach 120 divs and dont see the yanks staying out if the japs go south .
 
Top