What if there was an actual naval clash between British, US, and German Naval Forces during the firs

What if there was an actual naval clash between British, US, and German Naval Forces during the first Samoan War in 1889?

This would be been a very "interesting" three-way war, as each nation was backing a separate Samoan faction to get control of the islands. Each of the powers may have taken the opportunity to attack the other's colonies. I suspect that Germany would gotten the worst of from England it in losing its colonies, especially in Africa, as its forces were more forward deployed in Africa to move against most of its German colonies, especially in southern Africa. It is also possible the the recently united Germany would have struck back by encouraging the Boer Republics in South Africa to move against the English colony in South Africa, in hopes of relieving pressure on their South African colonies.

We could have also seen an escalation of forces along the British and US borders, if the two English speaking nations decided that their differences were acute enough in Samoa to rule out the possibility of a temporary alliance against a common enemy in Germany. I think Great Britain would have received the worst of it along the Canadian front. Its forces would have been too stretched over its colonial holdings to have been able to mount an effective counter attack against the US Eastern Seaboard.

However, to my knowledge, Great Britain was more forward deployed in the Pacific at the time. The US could have done very little to push back British power in East Asia at the time. It is quite possible that The English would have attempted to gain control of Hawaii, knowing full well that the United States had been interested in the territory. It may have also made naval and land raids into Alaska (from Canada), which the United States probably would have had a very hard time defending. Alaska would have ended up being "recaptured".

The Germans would not have been able to hold onto to their Pacific holdings for long, but it is remotely possible that they could have attempted to stir up Moari nationalism in British New Zealand (not too far fetched, the Germans attempted to stir up old historical ghosts between Mexico and the United States in WWI). However, New Zealand would have been too remote for the Germans to have been able to do this effectively, if at all.

It is also quite possible that France, as an independent actor, would have tried to attack the western frontiers of Germany to regain Alsace and Lorraine, lost during the Franco-Prussian War. This would have been a risky move, as the bulk of Germany's forces were concentrated in Europe. England would have done nothing if the war went disastrously for France again. They would only care if recently united Germany made threatening moves into the Low Countries, which is what prompted British intervention in the actual First World War.

Please see:

https://books.google.com/books?id=l...britain&pg=PA47#v=onepage&q=bigger war&f=true

Of course, the mystical powers that be decided that now was not the time for a world war, and conveniently sent a powerful storm to seriously damage the fleets of all three potential aggressors.

Brian Ghilliotti

https://brianghilliotti.tumblr.com https://brian-ghilliotti.newsvine.com/ https://del.icio.us/brian_ghilliotti http://brianghilliotti.weebly.com/

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win" Mahatma Ghandi (attributed)
 
Hmmmmmm...Brits wind up controlling Hawaii and Alaska. Butterflies the size of Pteranodons.
 
You mean Britain end up losing Canada?
Not necessarily. Much as I think the US has been pretty awful at grand strategy this last century, during the late 19th/early 20th it presents the absolute gold standard of "how to cheaply become the most powerful state". The conduct of Anglo/American relations at this time was really quite impressive, they managed a massive power transition with minimal issues; escalating a dispute in the Pacific to an invasion of Canada would be quite the opposite. The US would certainly win such a conflict, on land, but it would be a departure in policy at odds with what appears to be the prevalent view at the time of managing relations prudently and competently.

More generally though there is no way that the Germans could do anything significant in the Pacific. The RN reigned totally supreme and would've chased them out no worries. The USN probably wouldn't have seriously tried to contest the RN after a clash there, it simply lacked the resources. IMO the most interesting result of such a clash though would be the effect it might have in Australasia. This was around the time Federation was being considered in the colonies; NZ stayed out due to a lack of incentive and relative economics more than a serious identity difference (though this was growing). In the early 1890's though the economic situation was slightly more in the Australian colonies favour, and if a serious threat was perceived from both Germany and the US they might well have joined earlier along with NZ, and even Fiji though that's still unlikely.

In Europe I doubt there'd be many significant events, at least initially. Franco-German relations were actually reasonable in the 1880's, and the gap between them was much smaller than it would be by 1914. Britain was still remaining aloof, while the other Great Powers were relatively stable.
 
Not necessarily. Much as I think the US has been pretty awful at grand strategy this last century, during the late 19th/early 20th it presents the absolute gold standard of "how to cheaply become the most powerful state". The conduct of Anglo/American relations at this time was really quite impressive, they managed a massive power transition with minimal issues; escalating a dispute in the Pacific to an invasion of Canada would be quite the opposite. The US would certainly win such a conflict, on land, but it would be a departure in policy at odds with what appears to be the prevalent view at the time of managing relations prudently and competently.

More generally though there is no way that the Germans could do anything significant in the Pacific. The RN reigned totally supreme and would've chased them out no worries. The USN probably wouldn't have seriously tried to contest the RN after a clash there, it simply lacked the resources. IMO the most interesting result of such a clash though would be the effect it might have in Australasia. This was around the time Federation was being considered in the colonies; NZ stayed out due to a lack of incentive and relative economics more than a serious identity difference (though this was growing). In the early 1890's though the economic situation was slightly more in the Australian colonies favour, and if a serious threat was perceived from both Germany and the US they might well have joined earlier along with NZ, and even Fiji though that's still unlikely.

In Europe I doubt there'd be many significant events, at least initially. Franco-German relations were actually reasonable in the 1880's, and the gap between them was much smaller than it would be by 1914. Britain was still remaining aloof, while the other Great Powers were relatively stable.
The other guy suggested that the US would lose Alaska and Hawaii,which is pure bs.My point is that in the unlikely scenario that a war does erupt between the US and Britain,Canada is probably screwed.
 
The other guy suggested that the US would lose Alaska and Hawaii,which is pure bs.My point is that in the unlikely scenario that a war does erupt between the US and Britain,Canada is probably screwed.
Fair, certainly agree with that. Well, I am sure the UK could nick Hawaii but not much else.
 
conveniently sent a powerful storm to seriously damage the fleets of all three potential aggressors.

Not quite.
'On 13 March 1889, when a hurricane hit Apia, Samoa, there was damage to ‘every vessel in the harbour or shore except the English man-of-war Calliope, which got to sea’. Of those in harbour, two American ships, the Trenton and the Vandalia, as well as two German ships, the Adler and the Eber, were a total loss, and two more ships, the American Nipsic and German Olga, were badly damaged. Despite many of the crews being saved, the loss of life was horrific. Reports state that ‘the Vandalia lost four officers and thirty-nine men ... and the Nipsic lost seven men’. In addition, ‘German losses are ninety-six’, bringing the total loss of life to 146.
Such a tragedy brought with it questions about how and why the German and American ships had not been able to get to sea as the British had done. Although the British ship had been nearer to the harbour entrance, its location was not the reason cited for avoiding the disaster, but that it was stocked with quality fuel. While the British ship had easily been able to refuel with Westport coal at Auckland on the way to Apia, both the American and German ships had arrived without coal, and, despite possessions in the Pacific, had been unable to find quality fuel. The American coaling station of Pago-Pago, just thirty miles from Apia, had not been adequately supplied, and thus the ships were stranded in harbour. A New York Herald journalist remarked that although ‘the island was acquired in 1872 ... our government has not apparently discovered in seventeen years the strategic importance of having an ample supply of coal there’. It was then pointed out that ‘the nearest point at which coal could be obtained was Honolulu, 2,100 miles away’.
Even those who had been lucky enough to survive the ordeal faced a long wait before they could move on. Although coal had been sent nearly a month before the hurricane, the wooden ship carrying the coal from San Francisco would not arrive for another four weeks. Another ship, sent from Philadelphia, would have to navigate around Cape Horn to reach the Pacific, and thus was ‘months’ away. What is obvious from the tragic tale is that, although the hurricane was an unforeseeable disaster, Germany and the United States, despite growing as naval powers, were not able to match Great Britain in terms of naval coaling infrastructure.

The coal infrastructure point adds to this very sensible comment:
More generally though there is no way that the Germans could do anything significant in the Pacific. The RN reigned totally supreme and would've chased them out no worries. The USN probably wouldn't have seriously tried to contest the RN after a clash there, it simply lacked the resources.
 
Top