When is earliest Hitler would have plausibly considered USW in western hemisphere shipping lanes?
I have attached a poll. I outline some potentially relevant strategic and diplomatic events that might argue for plausibility at one time versus another.
One thing I do not deal with directly in this post is perceived capability to undertake any such campaign of value at all, which might not be possible in earlier periods.
A. 1 November 1939
Relevant events by this point: Polish campaign is done, the Nazi-Soviet pact and trade agreements held, the British and French have declared war, tried a weak attack on the Saar, bombed with leaflets and not rescinded or been receptive to German peace offers. Western Allies have started blockade and total economic warfare. The war with the west is on, to Hitler’s surprise, despite the meager fighting on the ground and the air.
B. 1 January 1940
Relevant events by this point: Not many more new developments by this point except for the Soviet-Finnish War. But everything that happened by November indicating the war is definitely on with the west has sunken in further
C. 10 April 1940
Relevant events by this point: The Germans are committed to the attack in Scandinavia, expecting opposition and prepared to accept naval risks
D. 10 May 1940
Relevant events by this point: The Germans are committed to the attack in the west, and might envision winning the campaign that year.
See related poll thread: (
On May 1,1940, how long western campaign did Germany expect? :
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...g-western-campaign-did-germany-expect.453097/)
In OTL WWI, the US took 13 months to have substantial forces at the front. According to many responders on the preceding poll, the Germans might reasonably have predicted that the war would be decided with the French campaign far sooner than the impact of American troops could be felt. If France were defeated that season, American forces would have nowhere to land, except Britain which should be starved, if France were not defeated in that season, well then the war is lost anyway.
E. 1 July 1940
Relevant events by this point:
France has peace's out definitively, time to starve out Britain. Neither the Americans, not British, have a foothold in the European continent. Naval operations can begin to enjoy friendly air cover along the French coast
F. 1 October 1940
Relevant events:
All the above, plus the US intent to build up to a two nation fleet and conscripted military is now apparent.
G. 1 December 1940
Relevant events:
That rat Rosenfeld has been reelected and we know he hates us.
H. 1 April 1941
That rat Rosenfeld has conned the American Congress into voting for Lend-Lease legislation. The US now subsidizes our stubborn British enemy. He also had Churchill over in Washington DC for Christmas for pete's sake.
I. 1 July 1941
All the above, plus:
1) The US has expressed intent to aid the Soviets too
2) The scale of US support is becoming more apparent
3) The attack on the USSR, now going swimmingly, might just give Japan operational freedom to act against the UK and US, thus adding naval strength to the Axis and dividing Anglo-American efforts
J. 1 October 1941
All the above, plus:
At this point Hitler has almost nothing to lose, FDR and Churchill have gone to the point of meeting at Argentia and proclaiming the Atlantic Charter for the postwar world
K. Not until Japan is in the war against US or UK
This is the theory best summarized by Gerhard Weinberg, the time to strike back at America is only when the Japanese, who have some strength on the oceans, are committed to the fight, until then, American entry is a net negative. This is basically OTL.