What could've swung America into joining the Central Powers in WWI?

Solomaxwell6

Banned
I'm just curious; I recall that America was kind of torn between the two sides (obviously more pro-Entente, but with strong pro-Central sympathies). What could've pushed us into the Central camp? Preferably as small a change as possible, please.
 

EvolvedSaurian

Have a big fuss raised over the Brits building ships for the CSA. 50 years later, the people who read about that in the papers are the ones in charge.
 
Hapsburg

Hapsburg

Banned
Or, have a lot of 2nd or 3rd-generation immigrants from the German countries (sons and grandsons of the German 49'ers?) come into power. President Strauss, anyone?
 

M79

German-descendant leaders in US, fallout from Venezuela/Guyana border survey, British arrogance diplomatically or diplomatic miscalculations (Maybe a British equivalent of the Zimmerman telegram?), Allied raid on neutral shipping, US eyes Canada, etc.
 
NHBL

NHBL

one possibility...

Suppose that a slightly anglophobic president was in office, and insisted on the rules of neutrality being followed--by both sides. Unlawful seizures of American ships lead to an unfortuneate incident.
One tale I'm working on is based on just this concept--British seizures lead to American warships escorting merchants, and a confrotation in the North Sea leads to an unfortuneate exchange of fire, and ships sunk.
Historicaly, at least one southern congresscritter said that the USA should send "Ironclads" to get the ships through the British (illeagal) blockade.
And I think the thread is in the correct place--the more likely options do require a pre-1900 POD
 

Keenir

Banned
Solomaxwell6 said:
I'm just curious; I recall that America was kind of torn between the two sides (obviously more pro-Entente, but with strong pro-Central sympathies). What could've pushed us into the Central camp? Preferably as small a change as possible, please.
Click to expand...

have a US President who's not as afraid of alienating the pro-Britain businessmen in the US (or, before the War, have the preceeding President cut the ground out from under the wealthy business owners)
 

Redbeard

Banned
Both USA and Germany by early 20th century had strong labour movements that for different reasons failed politically. But I guess we wouldn't need major/ASB PoDs to have both USA and Germany have socialdemocratic governments by 1914. The biggest problem might be to have WWI break out "on schedule" but I believe a newly ascended SD government in Germany would have acted very much like the OTL one in 1914 (I.e. largely out of control once the spark has ignited the keg/mobilisation).

With the British cause much being connected to big business in USA (referring to other posts in this thread) I could very well see the US socialdemocratic movement in power see the German socialdemocratic cause as theirs, and this eventually (say 1917) lead to a US declaration of war on UK.

I'm not sure it would be of great conseqence in the first many years though, as the Grand Fleet (GF) lays conveniently between USA and Germany. If trying to unite the USN with the Hochseeflotte (HSF) both will seriously risk being defeated in detail. In longer terms (counting decades) a US-German block would of course have tremendous resources and be physically capable of building a navy challenging the GF - if their socialdemocratic governments will fund it...

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 

Syphon

You'd need some serious changes pre 1900.

What about if say US and German industrialists invest heavily in each others concerns to the extent that any disruption of trade between Gerany and the US would have dire consequences for the economies of both countries but worst for the US as they don't have a war to redirect production too.

It's could change the political climate as these industrialists would back politicians would would look out for their interests.

Or a later POD have the unofficial British blockade of the US become a official when some naval captain does something stupid and say engages a "neutral" Swedish ship in US waters.
This could lead to "Neutral" and US ships being escorted by the USN to their ports in Holland, Sweden and Denmark and I'm sure that these Neutrals would dream of onselling goods and resources to the CP at a tremdous profit. :D
 

Max Sinister

Banned
About a theoretical SPD-lead government in 1914 Germany: They'd have to deal with the mighty conservative powers (big agrarians of the East, capitalists, military, Prussian parliament - Prussia was essentially 2/3 of the empire, and other than the German parliament (which had first-past-the-post), Prussian parliament was elected by an antiquated system: All citizens in every constituency were divided into three classes, the rich, the middle, and the poor, so each class paid one third of the taxes. Of course, this greatly favored the Conservatives. [In one Prussian election, they got more than 100 seats compared to 7 {yes, seven!} for the SPD, although the SPD got more than one and a half the votes of the Conservatives.]).

However, they might do some smarter things: They wouldn't start unrestricted submarine warfare, they'd be willing to make a compromise peace when it becomes clear that the war will drag on and take many victims, they wouldn't force hundreds of thousands of Belgians to work in the German industry...
 

Tom_B

During the Spanish American War the Spanish had reached a secret agreement with France to use St. Pierre as a base for a cruiser raid off the US east coast. This idea got nixed at the last moment. If they had gone ahead and it had some effectiveness and the US found out about French involvement it could cause lasting resentment against France.

Even if this happens you still need a different president than Wilson. Probably Hearst is the best bet for the US joining the CP.

Tom
 

Rick Robinson

Teddy Roosevelt is an Anglophobe instead of an Anglophile.

Remember that the great American naval buildup was at the same time and on the same scale as the German buildup that so alarmed the Brits. The chief British naval constructor visited the US c. 1905 and was a bit awed to find something like 13 battleships and 14 armored cruisers simultaneously under construction.

Now, suppose that as all those ships are being built, TR is going around the country talking about supporting the Irish Fenians and "liberating" Canada. US-British relations go into the toilet, and there's constant tension in the Caribbean - with the Germans naturally taking the US side. The Brits align even more closely with Japan, further raising tensions. And so it goes ...

When war comes, the Brits will be on a sticky wicket. The US fleet and the High Seas Fleet cannot directly combine, but the US is much better positioned to send surface raiders against British commerce, while the Grand Fleet's main firepower is tied down guarding against the HSF. Moreover, in this scenario the US has probably built battlecruisers, specifically designed to attack British commerce.

-- Rick
 

Abdul Hadi Pasha

Banned
TR would have had to have had a stroke and gone insane for this to happen. What possible source of conflict is there between Britain and the US by WWI?

Rick Robinson said:
Teddy Roosevelt is an Anglophobe instead of an Anglophile.

Remember that the great American naval buildup was at the same time and on the same scale as the German buildup that so alarmed the Brits. The chief British naval constructor visited the US c. 1905 and was a bit awed to find something like 13 battleships and 14 armored cruisers simultaneously under construction.

Now, suppose that as all those ships are being built, TR is going around the country talking about supporting the Irish Fenians and "liberating" Canada. US-British relations go into the toilet, and there's constant tension in the Caribbean - with the Germans naturally taking the US side. The Brits align even more closely with Japan, further raising tensions. And so it goes ...

When war comes, the Brits will be on a sticky wicket. The US fleet and the High Seas Fleet cannot directly combine, but the US is much better positioned to send surface raiders against British commerce, while the Grand Fleet's main firepower is tied down guarding against the HSF. Moreover, in this scenario the US has probably built battlecruisers, specifically designed to attack British commerce.

-- Rick
Click to expand...
 

trajen777

Banned
Have the Central Powers order tons of equipment and material from the USA - Tie in banks for loans etc. Get Hearst on your side for PR. Have Britich stop ships and repeat the war of 1812 - less the impressed sailors
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top