US in a France never Falls 1940 - TL

[DuQuense]

There are several Scenarios,for a France Stops Fall Gelb, [pick your favorite]. So assume that France Wins in May. By June it is apparent that France will Hold.
Italy doesn't join the War, and slowly France with British Help begins to push the Germans Back.

Now it was apparent before WW 1 that the US was headed for the pre-eminent position as the worlds #1 Industrial/Economic Power.
During WW 1the US flexed it's growing powere a little, but after the War the US returned to Political & Military isolation. By 1938 the US military was smaller than countries like Belgium or Portugal.

This changed after the Fall of France, beginning a Military buildup that would end with 16 Million Americans passing thru the Military by end of 1945.
The mixing and moving of both Military and Home Front Personnel, fundamentally changed the US. Basically removing a lot of Cultural Sectionalism, and helping develop a Unified US Culture.

However in a France never Falls TL, There will not be this moving and mixing. The US will stay isolated, Sectionalism will remain powerful.

?So how will this US develop? ?Will the growing Industrial/Economic Power eventually force the US out of it's isolation?

 

[Wyragen-TXRG4P]

Funny so many seem to believe France could have won in 1940, that the German victory was basically just a flop, I knew of someone who was in the French military in this period, already by 1937 said that in a futur fight between France and Germany, Germany would win.
Only way would be the Soviet-Union attacking into Poland and Romania as soon as Belgium and Holland are at war, but that wouldn´t be a French victory, yar?

?So how will this US develop? ?Will the growing Industrial/Economic Power eventually force the US out of it's isolation?

Before entering WW2, the US birthrate was 1.8 child per woman.

Industries remaines inactive, there would still be new inventions but technological advance and economical growth would remaine slow for a while.

 

[MarkA]

There are several Scenarios,for a France Stops Fall Gelb, [pick your favorite]. So assume that France Wins in May. By June it is apparent that France will Hold.
Italy doesn't join the War, and slowly France with British Help begins to push the Germans Back.

Now it was apparent before WW 1 that the US was headed for the pre-eminent position as the worlds #1 Industrial/Economic Power.
During WW 1the US flexed it's growing powere a little, but after the War the US returned to Political & Military isolation. By 1938 the US military was smaller than countries like Belgium or Portugal.

This changed after the Fall of France, beginning a Military buildup that would end with 16 Million Americans passing thru the Military by end of 1945.
The mixing and moving of both Military and Home Front Personnel, fundamentally changed the US. Basically removing a lot of Cultural Sectionalism, and helping develop a Unified US Culture.

However in a France never Falls TL, There will not be this moving and mixing. The US will stay isolated, Sectionalism will remain powerful.

?So how will this US develop? ?Will the growing Industrial/Economic Power eventually force the US out of it's isolation?

Before WWI the US was a nett debtor state. In other words, its wealth was built on borrowing more than it repaid. Of the Great Powers, however, the UK and Germany were nett creditor states while France was beginning to tun its finances around. The UK in particular was investing in the US and buying up assests there at an accelerating rate.

During the Great War and before its involvement, the US became a nett creditor state by lending at a piratical rate to the Allies.

 

[tantalus1970a]

Industries remaines inactive, there would still be new inventions but technological advance and economical growth would remaine slow for a while.

This is most likely what would happen. WW2 was a huge stimulus to the US and in particular its government and army (the US army was tiny in peacetime).

Although there is one way for France to win in 1940. And that is for the Germans not to use Fall Gelb.

Originally they were going to repeat the Schlieffen Plan (more or less) and go through North Belgium to the Channel and then swing round on Paris, as in 1914.

For reasons that would take me half an hour to type, they changed their minds and sent their Schwerpunkt through the Ardennes.

The Allies were expecting the Germans to repeat Schlieffen and moved their troops into position to meet it. Thats why the Germans were so successful in cutting them off from France.

I think the Germans would still win simply because they had a battle-hardened army and knew what they were doing, it would just take a lot longer. But it's France's only real chance.

 

[altamiro]

Funny so many seem to believe France could have won in 1940, that the German victory was basically just a flop, I knew of someone who was in the French military in this period, already by 1937 said that in a futur fight between France and Germany, Germany would win.

Yes, but it would be a Pyrrhic victory - killing a significant part of the army, wrecking the economy further (remember that Nazi economic model post-1938 pretty much relied on robbing conquered nations to go on), and finally stirring enough public discontent. The result would be a coup against Hitler or a popular movement (strikes etc.) Until 1942-43, Nazis relied more on bribing the general German populace into acquiescence than by intimidating it. The bribing won't be possible in a scenario where Germany fights a war of attrition against France.

Before entering WW2, the US birthrate was 1.8 child per woman.

Should this not automatically lead to a decline and takeover by teh ev0l darkies?

 

[Astrodragon]

Funny so many seem to believe France could have won in 1940, that the German victory was basically just a flop, I knew of someone who was in the French military in this period, already by 1937 said that in a futur fight between France and Germany, Germany would win.
Only way would be the Soviet-Union attacking into Poland and Romania as soon as Belgium and Holland are at war, but that wouldn´t be a French victory, yar?

In a fight between germany and France yes, germany would win.
But they arent fighting France. They are fighting France, the British Empire, Belgium (maybe Holland and Norway as well)....and have to keep a very watchful eye on Russia...

 

[tantalus1970a]

In a fight between germany and France yes, germany would win.
But they arent fighting France. They are fighting France, the British Empire, Belgium (maybe Holland and Norway as well)....and have to keep a very watchful eye on Russia...

Well, they were fighting the BEF, not the Empire, but I see your point.

But I think the Germans still win, unless they either screw up, or they are halted by German High Command who have panicked that they are too far ahead of their supporting units (this happened twice between May 10th and May 20th).

The Germans have a wartime army and the Allies still have peacetime armies (the French command structure was like a bureaucrat's paradise). They also have the initiative, which is massively important, especially when the Germans were fighting an enemy who were basically incompetent.

In 1940, the Allies had more tanks and about the same number of aircraft as the Germans, but still got their arses kicked. Because the Germans knew what they were doing and the Allies didn't. For instance, British tanks not only didn't have radios, their commanders had to buy their own maps.

 

[SeptimusMagistos]

In the long run, this scenario could be good for the US. Though military research can have unexpected benefits, and WWII helped production and many other factors, the fact is that a large military costs money. If the US maintains only a minimal fighting force, it has more of its budget to spend on other things, and there have been some countries that saw success with that.

 

[Hecatee]

have the belgian commander at Eben Emal decide that no, the roof of the fort is not a football terrain and should be full of mines and AA sites ables to shoot horizontaly and this will give a very bloody nose to the german parachutists who in OTL landed in the goals on the roof, probably preventing the fall of the fort. This in itself gives at least one or two more days to Belgium and the allies to react more correctly, and allows for more dutch forces to retreat in Belgium to mount a better defense. Sure it isn't in the Ardennes, but will still be an issue for the OKH. Then from there try to find other points to turn the french defense to a more effective posture and go from there. For the US it means that they are probably less efficient when the Japane Pearl Harbor them, delaying their operations by some months and probably allowing the capture of Guadalcanal by the Japs and the building of the airfield. Then the US will be seriously hampered and N-Z and Oz would have quite a few problems to deal with, with the UK also seing it's efforts in Africa hampered, if the Germans send an Africa Corps (less probable though). Or you have the war end in 1941 before the Japanese strike, and then the US are much worse due to the lack of military experience and equipements that will then prevent their post-WW2 world operations. The interesting question would then be what of Japan if they do not go to war with the US and western allies, maybe they get their fuel from the Dutch who sell all that they can in order to pay for the reconstruction of their country.
Also no Manhattan project means much later A Bomb.
Finally their is the SU : what will happen if Germany collapses before Barabrossa ? They will be able to improve their army but will they launch their war against the west ?

 

[tantalus1970a]

have the belgian commander at Eben Emal decide that no, the roof of the fort is not a football terrain and should be full of mines and AA sites ables to shoot horizontaly and this will give a very bloody nose to the german parachutists who in OTL landed in the goals on the roof, probably preventing the fall of the fort. This in itself gives at least one or two more days to Belgium and the allies to react more correctly, and allows for more dutch forces to retreat in Belgium to mount a better defense. Sure it isn't in the Ardennes, but will still be an issue for the OKH. Then from there try to find other points to turn the french defense to a more effective posture and go from there.

Probably the Allies best chance. But the key word is effective. Because in 1940 the Allies are anything but!

France not falling requires a LOT of people on the Allied side suddenly to become competent instead of incompetent. That's the only way the result changes.

 

[Wyragen-TXRG4P]

Yes, but it would be a Pyrrhic victory - killing a significant part of the army, wrecking the economy further (remember that Nazi economic model post-1938 pretty much relied on robbing conquered nations to go on), and finally stirring enough public discontent. The result would be a coup against Hitler or a popular movement (strikes etc.)

Gee, why didn´t that happen IOTL? Lootin´ conquered nations? Small countries where only a trifle, German population was 80 millions. It´s like the US economy depending on the occupation of Mexico and Irland.

Should this not automatically lead to a decline and takeover by teh ev0l darkies?

We Greys are not darkies!

 

[Faeelin]

Gee, why didn´t that happen IOTL? Lootin´ conquered nations? Small countries where only a trifle, German population was 80 millions. It´s like the US economy depending on the occupation of Mexico and Irland.

The salvation of the German economy through plunder is well attested. Go read The Wages of Destruction and The Low Dishonest Decade, then report back.

 

[Cook]

Gee, why didn´t that happen IOTL? Lootin´ conquered nations? Small countries where only a trifle, German population was 80 millions. It´s like the US economy depending on the occupation of Mexico and Irland.

I’m afraid to say this wasn’t the wisest thing to say.

The German economy was maintained by plundering the conquered nations and by the raw materials provided by the Nazi-Soviet Pact.

 

[von Adler]

There's lots of opinions and few facts in this thread, I am afraid.

The western allies were less effective than the Germans in May 1940, yes, but especially the French learned at a very high pace. By mid-June, they fought in hedgehog defences, empowered their lower officers and NCOs, used light artillery against tanks in a decentralised manner etc. However, as the cream of the Frecnh army had been destroyed already, it did not help. But it can be noted that Fall Rot took as much tme and casualties for the Germans as Fall Gelb did, despite the BEF having left the field and the Belgians and Dutch having surrendered and the best and heaviest of the French army being destroyed already.

Give the French a month of fighting, and still retaining their allies and their best forces (even if worn down) and the Germans are in for a world of hurt.

While the French have a smaller industrial base than the Germans, they were outproducing them in war materials from winter 1939 and their plans for 1940 were most impressive, and augmented by large purchases from the US.

Late summer/autumn 1940 there were 4 Indian, 2 Australian, 1 New Zealand and 4 Canadian Divisions ready, IIRC. If Italy stays out (which they will if France is not going down) these can be sent to France instead of the UK, Egypt, Hong Kong, Burma, Malaya and East Africa. And that is not counting the British divisions in the same places.

Together, France and Britain and her Empire has a larger industrial base, more people, better economy and above all access to the world markets which Germany does not have. If the Germans do get stuck in Belgium summer 1940, they would probably have a hard time breaking France.

 

[merlin]

It is often underestimated what the impact of French purchases did to the US aircraft & aero-engine industries.
Many French aircraft were ordered on the basis of two versions, one with French engine(s) and the other with US engine(s).
Many US aircraft had French orders - P-36, P-40, A-20, B-24, Wildcat, Vindicator etc. While some of these orders were at the expense of US orders in terms of places on the production line, it did mean that the impetous for new factories happened sooner.
In a situation where France fights on - US production (& wealth) will increase. It may mean that the amount of US aircraft for the RAF will decrease - because no French orders gets passed on!
But I don't see much difference with the Japanese, the chappenge for France & Britain with Germany is too high, to divert any detterence against Japan.

 

[Markus]

Italy doesn't join the War, and slowly France with British Help begins to push the Germans Back.

Slowly? If France does not fall, the Nazis will and fairly soon. There was no, nada, zero public support for another long world war. The Fall of France was celebrated by the Germans because they saw it as the beginning of the end of the war.

@Wyragen-TXRG4P: Try "The Blitzkrieg Legend" If these event had not happened no one would believe they could have. A "WI France had fallen" would trigger the same reactions as "WI Operation S...n had succeeded"

 

[von Adler]

The combined resources of France and the UK with the Empire and Commonwealth was larger than those of Germany.

Anyway, the discussion was about the US - I do not think the US would abandon isolationism in this scenario. The US armed forces would remain relatively small. The big question is if the Japanese will act in this scenario. They probably will, and then the US will do a belated armament rush.

With France still in the fight, the Japanese will have to invade French Indochina and fight the French Far Eastern Squadron as well as the ABDA forces, which puts them at less of an advantage. The French and British not having to fight the Italians or watch the Med will allow them to put more resources against the Japanese.

I foresee the Japanese collapsing in 1944 or so. The US will be much more focused on the Pacific, although they will probably aid the allies in France as well. So the USMC and USN will probably be stronger while the army, especially the armour, will be weaker.

 

[Fearless Leader]

No fall of France would certainly affect the events of the 1940's election. With Germany stymied in Western Europe there would be far less of a push towards interventionism in American politics. For the GOP it probably means that Dewey keeps his momentum as his lack of foreign policy experience isn't viewed as much of a negative factor. For the Democrats, it could mean FDR calling it quits, if he does, I think you could very well see the GOP making significant strides politically.

 

[Markus]

No fall of France would certainly affect the events of the 1940's election. With Germany stymied in Western Europe there would be far less of a push towards interventionism in American politics. For the GOP it probably means that Dewey keeps his momentum as his lack of foreign policy experience isn't viewed as much of a negative factor. For the Democrats, it could mean FDR calling it quits, if he does, I think you could very well see the GOP making significant strides politically.

And economically the first two naval expansion acts were already law. No.1 increased the USN to treaty limits, No.2 added 20%, though there won´t be a No.3, the Two-Ocean-Navy Act.

 

[CurlyGangster]

Before entering WW2, the US birthrate was 1.8 child per woman.

(nitpick warning)
No, in 1940 the US fertility rate in 1940 was 2.3 Chidren per women. I honestly don't seeing it dropping .5 children in a year, even if that did happen that can be ruled out as a bad year fertility wise.
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/haines.demography

Anyway, since this has gone from what would happen to the US if France never falls to the Whermacht to the plausility of France not falling to the Whermacht.

There are several big if's here. If the US enters the war only against Japan it would end with a curbstomped Japan by late 1944 or early 1945. The British and French (mainly British) may not get so worn out since the war won't last as long or be so devastating. If France never falls, the German advance eventually is stopped and the British and French use their superior resources to eventually defeat the Germans.

By the end of the war the US may like after WW1 return to its Isolationism and like Fearless Leader pointed out the GOP may make a resurgence. The British and French will try and maintain their Colonial Empires. I am not exactly sure what the USSR will do.