What if the United States joined Germany in WW1?

[Alex1guy]

It's really curious that some people here seem to think that German submarine warfare resulting in loss of American lives was limited to the Lusitania--at least that's the only incident they ever mention. They seem to have forgotten about the Falaba (the "Thrasher incident"), the Gulflight, the Ancona, the Arabic, the Sussex... My point is not to debate the facts of these incidents one by one but to emphasize that it was the cumulative effect of all these incidents that left a very bad impression of Germany in the American mind. Now, Americans for the most part did not want to go with Germany over these incidents, and were generally happy when the Sussex pledge seemed to put an end to the immediate threat of such a war. Once that was done, they did devote more attention to British violations of American rights, and undoubtedly any were upset about them. But not so upset that they wanted to go to war with the Entente, let alone to align themselves with a Germany that had perpetrated all these incidents (as well as espionage and sabotage in the US). The Entente, like the Germans, could violate American rights to some extent without the US going to war.

It's too late, they're already talking about the US, after losing a ship, invading long time friend and ally, Canada :/

 

[McPherson]

German submarines would be operating out of American Naval bases as well as the Americans building German submarines.
The real killer would be the lack of American loans, France in the British Empire would run out of cash.
The U S Navy wouldn't be a threat but trying to contain them would require station loyal Navy units in Halifax. Every ship in Halifax is one that is not guarding the North Sea and every Soldier defending Canada is one less defending Paris

Uhm. The British have 50% superiority in the Grand Fleet in the North Sea in 1916. Say they put that 50% to work headed for Nova Scotia? What is the likely US response?

RN...………………………………………USN (In home waters)

4...….BCs...…………………………..0
14.....BBs...………………………….14 (The Pennsylvanias and Nevadas are in the OOB)
20(?).PDNs...……………………….20
4...….ACR...………………………….10
25.....CA...…………………………...18
14.....CL.....………………………….0
35.....DD...…………………………..35
0...….PTs.……………………………..15
10.....SS...…………………………...18

25+...colliers...…………………...Not needed, every US ship can reach the Grand Banks from Boston and New York with combat maneuver reserve.

Site of battle?

Halifax to Norfolk?

2000 km

Halifax to NEW YORK?

1500 km

Halifax to BOSTON?

1450 km

Halifax to Plymouth, UK?

4600 km

RN tactical sortie radius with collier support? (No oilers, the UK oil supply has been turned off at the well heads) about what I showed in previous map, but one way it is sortie capable of about 5,000 km on average except for those destroyers. Those pesky destroyers, the modern types burn fuel oil and can make the trip?? The coal fired ones, can't.

So that half of the Grand Fleet a mixed bag of oil and coal fired ships heads towards their rendezvous with destiny. They have to reach a CLASS III naval base. Unable to repair dreadnoughts or fuel them.

Waiting for them is LANTFLT. What are Beatty's chances because Jellicoe has been fired for pointing out the obvious?

Frank F. Fletcher (master of torpedo warfare.)

Not a chance in HELL.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

All this BS about fleets sailing here and there?

If the US simply turned off the support to the Entente because of 'vague handwavium' then that is pretty much that - the USA is now effectively part of the CPs

So the war ends?

Then what?

They have royally pissed off 3 of the world's major powers....to what gain for the USA?

And all 3 powers will have one hell of a 'stab in the back' mythology knowing full well who wielded the knife.

So I have to ask as I usually do when we are presented with 'vague handwavium' OPs such as this one "What's in it for the USA?"

 

[McPherson]

All this BS about fleets sailing here and there?

If the US simply turned off the support to the Entente because of 'vague handwavium' then that is pretty much that - the USA is now effectively part of the CPs

So the war ends?

Then what?

They have royally pissed off 3 of the world's major powers....to what gain for the USA?

And all 3 powers will have one hell of a 'stab in the back' mythology knowing full well who wielded the knife.

So I have to ask as I usually do when we are presented with 'vague handwavium' OPs such as this one "What's in it for the USA?"

Fleets sailing here and there become an interesting teaching moment so that one can illustrate logistics, geography, force distribution and leadership issues in the context of a Bat guano maniacal insane situation. And before the ASB brigade dogpiles me...

… WORLD WAR I started with a Bat guano maniacal insane situation.

What was in it for any of the European states when that (^^^) happened?

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Fleets sailing here and there become an interesting teaching moment so that one can illustrate logistics, geography, force distribution and leadership issues in the context of a Bat guano maniacal insane situation. And before the ASB brigade dogpiles me...

… WORLD WAR I started with a Bat guano maniacal insane situation.

What was in it for any of the European states when that (^^^) happened?

It did require a certain 'Blank Cheque' from a certain Kaiser to the A-H Empire though and even he did a double take when he saw the subsequent terms they sent to the Serbians.

Once they had kicked away the chocks the war that the Europeans powers had been planning for for over 30s years in an environment of extreme mistrust backed by extremely poor communication was virtually unstoppable

Those conditions do not exist with the USA to cause a '180 degree' jumping in with the CP - 2 years down the line due to 'Vague Handwavium'

The USA doing a political about face 'turning on a dime' is ASB - the political landscape would have to have been massively different and this would impact decision making well before when those pistol shots were heard in Serbia.

 

[McPherson]

It did require a certain 'Blank Cheque' from a certain Kaiser to the A-H Empire though and even he did a double take when he saw the subsequent terms they sent to the Serbians.

Once they had kicked away the chocks the war that the Europeans powers had been planning for for over 30s years in an environment of extreme mistrust backed by extremely poor communication was virtually unstoppable

Those conditions do not exist with the USA to cause a '180 degree' jumping in with the CP - 2 years down the line due to 'Vague Handwavium'

The USA doing a political about face 'turning on a dime' is ASB - the political landscape would have to have been massively different and this would impact decision making well before when those pistol shots were heard in Serbia.

There is a difference between an Austrian nobleman being shot and Pearl Harbor, to be sure, but seriously? This is Woodrow Wilson. It would not take much to see him doing a Kaiser Bill II kind of thing. Pancho Villa is kind of another teaching moment in lunacy.

Just saying... Never say never. All you have to be is an idiot to make weird unbelievable crazy things happen.

 

[Coulsdon Eagle]

Apart from that, wasn't the US army in 1917 provided with mostly french weapons, ammunition, airplanes and tanks?
I don't think it would be that easy for the US to raise an army without that.

https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-11...-soldiers-depended-foreign-weapons-technology
https://angrystaffofficer.com/2017/...s-army-went-to-war-armed-with-french-weapons/

And the germans were surpised that the US fought with 1914 tactics in 1917.

IIRC the Allies requested that cross Atlantic shipping was devoted to manpower instead of weapons. Guns, shells, they had in abundance by that time along with the capacity to build more (look at the plans to build the Mark VIII Liberty tank in Paris). What Britain & France were running out of was men, hence Foch's plan for 1919 being based upon large numbers of fresh American & West African troops.

Undoubtedly Pershing could have landed with pretty-much fully equipped units but with far fewer divisions.

 

[M79]

IIRC the Allies requested that cross Atlantic shipping was devoted to manpower instead of weapons. Guns, shells, they had in abundance by that time along with the capacity to build more (look at the plans to build the Mark VIII Liberty tank in Paris). What Britain & France were running out of was men, hence Foch's plan for 1919 being based upon large numbers of fresh American & West African troops.

Undoubtedly Pershing could have landed with pretty-much fully equipped units but with far fewer divisions.

I'd like to see what the impact of the Fusil Automatique 1918 has here

 

[BigBlueBox]

Taking the above away, if the US doesn't support the Entente (much less actively oppose), and Germany defeats Russia as it does historically, does it then turn and win the war or force a settlement?
Looking at the above, we should remember, there was strong support for Germany until the Lusitania / Zimmerman note etc. There was a very large portion fo the US population that were 1st - 3rd gen German. Unlike Germany, the US had had two wars with the UK at that point and were international commerce rivals.

There was never, ever any meaningful support for Germany. Support for isolationism and support for the Central Powers are two very different things that you are conflating.

 

[edgeworthy]

No oilers, the UK oil supply has been turned off at the well heads

Huh...?

So Anglo-Iranian Oil and Royal Dutch Shell have just disappeared.
(These being the two largest suppliers of Petroleum Products to Britain in WW1)

 

[McPherson]

Huh...?

So Anglo-Iranian Oil and Royal Dutch Shell have just disappeared.
(These being the two largest suppliers of Petroleum Products to Britain in WW1)

WWII is NOT WW I. In WW I it was the US, Mexico and Venezuela.

As for Royal Dutch Shell, there is a little problem called the Philippine Islands and the American fleet based there. Also Holland was subjected to the Entente Blockade.

Good luck with that.

Iran does not supply enough in any quantity until 1920 despite Churchill's shenanigans in 1914. Good luck with that, too.

 

[Alex1guy]

There is a difference between an Austrian nobleman being shot and Pearl Harbor, to be sure, but seriously? This is Woodrow Wilson. It would not take much to see him doing a Kaiser Bill II kind of thing. Pancho Villa is kind of another teaching moment in lunacy.

Just saying... Never say never. All you have to be is an idiot to make weird unbelievable crazy things happen.

Yeah but the reality was the US had to much money tied up with the Entente and little to gain from German victory. If you want to have the US angry enough to actually join Germany and engage in a long bitter struggle that brings the war right to Americas doorstep, you need more than a few mistakes by the British. Wilson (unlike the Kaiser) just cant unilaterally declare war himself, he needed congressional support and that's going to be a hard sell. You need to poison relations earlier between Britain and America somehow, they aren't going to reverse a whole lot of policy on a whim for a few ships being sunk.

 

[M79]

Yeah but the reality was the US had to much money tied up with the Entente and little to gain from German victory. If you want to have the US angry enough to actually join Germany and engage in a long bitter struggle that brings the war right to Americas doorstep, you need more than a few mistakes by the British. Wilson (unlike the Kaiser) just cant unilaterally declare war himself, he needed congressional support and that's going to be a hard sell. You need to poison relations earlier between Britain and America somehow, they aren't going to reverse a whole lot of policy on a whim for a few ships being sunk.

If the US stays out long enough that the Allies look ready to collapse, could a reverse Zimmerman telegram happen? Maybe Britain offers land (maybe Yukon, Alberta, and BC?) to the US in exchange for coming into the fight?

 

[Cryhavoc101]

If the US stays out long enough that the Allies look ready to collapse, could a reverse Zimmerman telegram happen? Maybe Britain offers land (maybe Yukon, Alberta, and BC?) to the US in exchange for coming into the fight?

Nice idea - however post July 1st 1867 it was no longer Britains to give!

 

[Alanith]

Nice idea - however post July 1st 1867 it was no longer Britains to give!

Doesn't mean that will stop a desperate Britain.

 

[NotedCoyote]

Doesn't mean that will stop a desperate Britain.

What would be the result though? The US, outraged at being offered Canadian territory that the UK no longer directly controls, declares war on the UK and invades and violently occupies the territory that the UK offered it? Hard to imagine what the Canadians could do to piss off both the UK and the US enough to make that plausible... particularly since if anyone would be outraged by the offer enough to break long-standing ties with the UK, you'd think it would be Canada.

 

[Alex1guy]

What would be the result though? The US, outraged at being offered Canadian territory that the UK no longer directly controls, declares war on the UK and invades and violently occupies the territory that the UK offered it? Hard to imagine what the Canadians could do to piss off both the UK and the US enough to make that plausible... particularly since if anyone would be outraged by the offer enough to break long-standing ties with the UK, you'd think it would be Canada.

Yeah you'd just get Canada leaving the war and declaring independence more than anything

 

[HARRY]

First off the Japanese who were on the Allies side in WW1 would take the Philippines and maybe even liberate Hawaii. The Canadians had 630,000 enlisted during the war a big leap their original standing army of 3500 at the start of which only 424,000 served overseas which means at anyone time there were 10's of thousand men being trained by combat veterans to go across and fight it would not be a walk over. There had also been reports of a Germany/Irish militia in the USA a the start of the war so plans had be made for a attack from over the border and they would have time to build up defenses as the US builds up to attack it would not be the walk over assumed.
The Europe at least for Germany would not be affected apart from a moral boost at British navy keeping the German navy bottled in would also prevent the US bring them much needed supplies.

 

[Coulsdon Eagle]

Doesn't mean that will stop a desperate Britain.

Wasn't there a Clive Cussler novel that revolved around Asquith & Churchill selling Canada to the US around 1915? Not sure that is more or less likely than Raise the Titanic (as Lew Grade commented, it would be cheaper to lower the Atlantic).

 

[raharris1973]

It would be interesting to see a US occupied Canadian populace succeed in using a legal campaign in US courts, nonviolent civil disobedience, an insurgency, or some combination of the three to regain independence from the a US with growing doubts about the propriety and necessity of the whole war. I'm not sure if a Canadian political resistance movement would coalesce around a demand for a restoration of the pre-war status quo, or, seeing that as impractical, seek an independent republican Canadian state or confederacy unattached to Britain.