How could we with a POD no earlier then 1898 end up with a US that is expansionist,imperialistic and rabidly anti entente? One that is not only not supplying the entente but actually fighting it.
If you have a search, old boy, you might find a couple of threads with some ideas. Unless the search function's acting up, of course!
If you have a search, old boy, you might find a couple of threads with some ideas. Unless the search function's acting up, of course!
The search function dislikes me...I search map thread v, and it's about the seventh thing on the list... anything else doesn't even show up half the time
It might be slightly easier- still absurdly hard, of course- if you allow for other circumstances in which the USA is on the side of the Alliance. They don't necessarily have to be that much more imperialistic and expansionist than OTL. After all, if you think about it, France and Britain has colonies and other holdings in America, Germany and the Habsburgs haven't, though I somehow doubt Monroe-extremism could be made a sufficiently strong in just 16 years...How could we with a POD no earlier then 1898 end up with a US that is expansionist,imperialistic and rabidly anti entente? One that is not only not supplying the entente but actually fighting it.
There is also the matter of the general American distaste for absolute monarchies by 1910 or so. The King of England was bad enough, even with his being pretty much defanged, but the Kaiser & the Tsar?
Something that is also often forgotten is that a lot of Americans, especially in policy making positions, sincerely believed we owed France one, hence the whole "Layfette, we are HERE!" bit.
Not to mention that Germany and Austria-Hungary weren't proper absolute monarchies, but constitutional monarchies with strong monarch.Actually, the Kaiser and the other Kaiser und Konig - the US was already on the same side as the Tsar(well, for about -1 month, February Revolution and all
).
On a side note, I love your proper English vernacular MrP.