WI: America Declares war on China during the Korean war.

I heard on the military channel, that the chinese was actively sending soldiers to fight the korean war and back at the white house, the americans said that they would fight china too, and they just didn't mean fight, they meant a all-out nuclear fight.




What would happen if america DID declare war on china during the korean war? Would the USSR step in? Would a third world war break out?
 

Commissar

Banned
If Truman decided to escalate, then B-29s would begin firebombing Chinese Cities.

The Chinese had little defense against it and the MiG-15 proved to be a poor interceptor of B-29s which had been updated with new fire control systems for its defensive armaments since WW2 ended.

As it was, 16 B-29s were shot down for 16 MiG-15s, 17 probables, and 11 damaged.

The Japanese by contrast shot or rammed down 360 B-29s.

Once SAC ran out of Cities to Firebomb, it would just start hitting anything it felt like.
 
Status of nato?

Not just NATO, the UN. Quite a number of nations sent combat forces to Korea, and thus fought the Chinese troops there. I don't think any of them refused to fight the Chinese in Korea, though invading might be another story.

The NATO members wouldn't be obligated to join the invasion, but I'd guess the UK at least would participate.
 
Not just NATO, the UN. Quite a number of nations sent combat forces to Korea, and thus fought the Chinese troops there. I don't think any of them refused to fight the Chinese in Korea, though invading might be another story.

The NATO members wouldn't be obligated to join the invasion, but I'd guess the UK at least would participate.


I see, What would happen to the USA from here on out until 1971?

Would america win?
 
I am not sure that the Soviet Union would go to war to help the Chinese. They may offer weapons and maybe some "volunteer" pilots and planes, but a full scale war with the United States and NATO, doubtful.
 

Commissar

Banned
I am not sure that the Soviet Union would go to war to help the Chinese. They may offer weapons and maybe some "volunteer" pilots and planes, but a full scale war with the United States and NATO, doubtful.

Especially when most of their Army is tied down crushing uprisings in the Ukraine and Eastern Europe and they zero defense against SAC who would have rolled right over them.
 
I see, What would happen to the USA from here on out until 1971?

Would america win?

Not a freakin' clue on the former, and define "win" for the latter.

A fully committed US with the full support of the nations that sent troops to Korea IOTL might be able to take and hold all of Korea, but couldn't conquer China.
 
Problem is, the USA wasn't fully behind the war in Korea. We didn't really understand it. 'Contain the Red Menace, sure, I guess.' That sort of opinion soured by the time Vietnam came about, though, as media showed more of what was happening. You begin a full scale war with China, and a lot of Americans aren't going to understand why, and it might speed the appearance of some anti-war movements like we saw in the 60s.

Point is, you stick the full industrial might of the United States in kicking the crap out of China and North Korea - be damned what the USSR thought, and yes - Korea would be secured (US-led forces had reached the Yalu River when China intervened) and China would be torn a new one. NATO forces had a lot more potential to tear apart China than an overstretched Japan did a decade earlier.
 
Depends on the circumstances...

Take the leash off a psychopath like MacArthur (who did indeed want to drop nuclear weapons on China, not the first or last time him or the fellows at SAC proposed such an idea) and you've got a really fucked-up situation really, really fast. Assuming a situation where MacArthur's either out on his ass or his hand on the nuclear arsenal is stayed then we might have a slightly more contained conflict. Soviet intervention is... debateable to say the least, we might see a policy reminescent of early US policy on Afghanistan (let them bloody their noses). Ultimately the more conciliatory elements of the politburo might win out and the Soviets will leave Kim Il-Sung to his fate while they work on consolidating the soon-to-be Soviet bloc.

Military wise the gloves would come off on China pretty readily. Even with an influx of Soviet pilots and planes their efforts would still be left in the dust. We'd probably see a bomb them into submission type of strategy combined with naval strangleholds focusing on blockading the Chinese coast in addition to preventing the Chinese from getting opportunistic with Taiwan.

On the domestic front an escalated Korean War would inevitably mean that it has a larger presence in people's lives. In addition to affecting American history in a way that would probably butterfly away huge amounts of American policy decisions and world events, there probably would be a bigger anti-war movement. Maybe even on the level of the Vietnam War protests, possibly an earlier social upheaval since the anti-war movement played a huge part in opening that can of worms back in the 60s.
 
We just need Patton to live and run in 1948 for POTUS, with MacArthur as VP, and we can see a US Invasion of China (And the USSR).
 
I see the US army escalating a war against the Chinese.

1948 - UN security council declares Red China an aggressor as well after Chinese attacks and passes resolutions to eliminate the Chinese threat from the unification of Korea.

in 1948, if war was declared on China after the Chinese attcks, the first phase would be the bombing campaign and naval blockade as mentioned in previous posts.

The Chinese Nationalists would be used. Perhaps first on the Korean peninsula to bolster forces and then in operations elsewhere.

a manpower and supply buildup would begin again to raise an army not only for Korea but for defence in Europe should the Soviets try anything in responce. Just as many troops would be sent to Europe to bolster NATO forces as would go to the Pacific. Japan would resemble Britain in 1942 and 1943 before Normandy.

The USA would maximise efforts to build nuclear warheads which would result in even more ealy disparity with the Soviets than OTL. they would flaunt this disperity to warn the Soviets from being agressive against the increased UN force in Korea.

MacArthur is still sacked as he is too much of a premadanna. Talks too much. Still wants to use nuclear weopons. Truman is still firm against his showboating and against nuclear weopons in this expanded war. Omar Bradley is made top allied commander in charge of kicking the Chinese out of China.

In 1949, after the buildup of manpower and reserves for the Pacific and Europe, another Inchon movement would be made to trap the Chinese in Korea. The landings would be in Manchuria to trap the Chinese in Korea.

These would be widely successful again. US would seal off all forces inside of Korea.

Perhaps in 1950, there are US and Nat chinese landings not only in Manchuria but in other places along the coast of China similar to the Japanese tactic in WWII.

1951 - Peace talks, armistice, UN forces have strong defensible position in Manchuria. All of North Korea save for a portion in the NE to be South Korean. NE portion to be occupied by Soviets in armistice. ROC may also be given some territory in Manchuria and/or on coast especially in southern China. ROC will still want to fight on but will not have as much US or UN backing.

The goal of the USA was not to invade and conquer Communist China, but to win in Korea.

A stronger Asian alliance is formed simaler to NATO with Republic of China, Korea, Japan, ANZAC, Canada ... others to be added.

ROC is gained some additional territory, perhaps just Hainen Island.

Truman is credited with success. There are still others that say he should have strove to conquer Red Chinese. Bradley backs Truman saying that a protracted war with the Communinst Chinese would be the wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time, against the wrong enemy. Truman also being a wise student of history knows that the Chinese think in longer terms than Americans who want a quick victory. The Chinese would settle for a long struggle if he presses to conquer all of China.

Truman thinks about running again for office in 1952, but says that he has had enough. Bess is the real one who says that he has had enough and that it is time to go back to Independence, MO. His popularity does not tank as much as it did OTL.

The question would be since Korea is no longer seen as a quagmire and a debacle, would Eisenhower resign and run as a Republican as OTL? Would Adalai Stevenson be the Democratic candidate? US politcs could be vastly different. But overall, the Cold War continues.

Longer term effects - US intervenes in Cuba after Castro defects to Soviets. Vietnam is still a quagmire for the USA, still goes down pretty much as OTL.
 
Last edited:
Your timeline is a bit off hzn5pk; the Korean War didn't start until mid-1950, and in 1948 the Chinese Civil War is still undecided.

Yeah, his points are rather decent as a general rule-of-thumb, being a pretty realistic America wins scenario without relying on wanks or "Person X dies two seconds before they historically did and changes the world forever" Syndrome.

Though this does assume that it's kind of America calling the USSR's bluff, I don't think that an escalated Korean War would per se lead to WWIII but it might set up for it later.
 
Your timeline is a bit off hzn5pk; the Korean War didn't start until mid-1950, and in 1948 the Chinese Civil War is still undecided.

Crap, your right, sorry about that, I was going off the top of my head. OK so here is three years advances

1950 - N. Korea invades S. Korea
US holds at Puson Perimeter
MacArthur lands at Inchon, N Korea cut off, Race to the Yalu
China (PRC) intervenes

POD - UN declares PRC agressor, allows intervention to force Chinese withdrawl from Korea, allows for unification of Korea under UN.

US begins limited bombing campain of Manchuria after UN approval in December. Limited due to resources in theatre. Naval blockade is also issued.

Truman also decides to increase nuclear bomb development and production. Put it in another gear as a warning to the Soviets. He is adamit though that nuclear weopons will not be used against the Chinese.

1951 - US build up of troops in Europe and Japan, US bombing in China intensifies as more bomber units arive in China. ROC units are allowed to fight PRC in Korea, bolster UN forces. Allied strategy is actually to give some ground to Chinese in Korea to lure Chinese south as forces build up to land in Manchuria.

1951 - US build up of forces in Japan, plan for landing to cut off Chinese.

MacArthur is dismissed by Truman for wanting to use nukes against Chinese.

Bradley is sent to Japan to head invasion of Manchuria in '52. Ike is too important for NATO. Soviets still regarded as main threat.

1952 - Landings in Mancuria succeed as does race to trap Chinese in Korea. Chinese are trapped in Korea and surrender

Truman does not run in election, endorses Adalai Stevenson. Ike resigns and runs as Republican. I like Ike wins the day. Truman leaves office as a more popular president than OTL. Ike is now committed to closing the war down in Korea as he, Bradley and even Truman admit that fighting the Chinese is the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time against the wrong opponent.

1953 - Further landings along Chinese coast by US and ROC troops. Ike uses these to bring China to peace table, does not want protracted war against China.

1954 - Peace treaty, Armistice is signed. Korea except for NE portion is under ROK governemnt. Northeast portion for all purposes is made Soviet.

ROC gaines island of Hainan. Most US soldiers exit Asian mainland.

Sino-Soviet rift occurs as PRC wanted more aid from Soviets other than supplies, trainers, and pilots. PRC feels that Soviets abandoned them.

Some US forces remain in Korea for security, but most return home. Military commitment from US is less than OTL. Some US forces are also in ROC.

US more agressive against Cuba, does not let it become Soviet satelite.

Rest of Cold War occurs pretty much OTL. There are more long term effects for PRC China that I probably glossing over. USA still gets bogged down in Vietnam. Although there might be some ripple effect in Eastern Europe with dissenters. But perhaps the Soviet non-responce in Korea is met with more detente', meaning the Soviets are given a free hand to deal with uprisings in Europe. The NATO responce to these brutal show of Soviet force is mere rhetoric.

Japan is a real winner of Korean War as Us dollars flow freely to rebuild Japan to support war effort as US builds up forces.

PATO is formed. Pacific Asia Treaty Organisation, with US, Can, ANZAC, Phil, ROC, Korea, Japan and other developing countries. PATO troops are involved in Vietnam but only slightly larger than OTL, USA is still main contributor. USA still humbled, but experience transforms US military as a result of Vietnam.
 
Last edited:
Top