WI USA handles post WW2 traditionally?

The headline is vague. What I mean by "traditionally" means disband nearly all of the standing armed forces, no permanent peacetime alliances, and not much involvement in world affairs outside of North America and the Pacific (the occupation of Japan still happens because that is actually in line with nineteenth century US policies). Pretty much nothing that Washington wouldn't have approved of.

Simplest POD is something like a Byrnes administration, followed by a Robert Taft administration after 1948. Or maybe Roosevelt dies earlier and Taft defeats Wallace in 1944. What happens?
 

cpip

Gone Fishin'
The headline is vague. What I mean by "traditionally" means disband nearly all of the standing armed forces, no permanent peacetime alliances, and not much involvement in world affairs outside of North America and the Pacific (the occupation of Japan still happens because that is actually in line with nineteenth century US policies). Pretty much nothing that Washington wouldn't have approved of.

Simplest POD is something like a Byrnes administration, followed by a Robert Taft administration after 1948. Or maybe Roosevelt dies earlier and Taft defeats Wallace in 1944. What happens?

Well, the US had been starting to do just that in some ways, but it became quite obvious that the Soviets weren't retreating to their corner. The Turkish Straits Crisis, the Berlin Blockade, the Chinese Civil War -- and even despite all of this, the US still was drawing down its armed forces. Then the Korean War broke out, and the last nail in the coffin of demobilization hit.
 

raharris1973

Gone Fishin'
Donor
Monthly Donor
The US took risks in cutting down its ground and tactical air forces up through 1950 and the start of the Korean War that were never repeated in in later periods of military drawdown (Eisenhower's, Nixon-Ford-Carter's, Bush I-Clinton, Obama) that were highly criticized for.
 
Long range bombers and nuclear weapons made Washington's views on European entanglements obsolete. As others noted, the US did much of this included including a remarkable downsizing of the military in 1945-1946. Further, it's worth noting that the Republicans, traditionally the party of isolation, made the hard shift toward anti-communism after the Korean War as a means of discrediting Truman and the democrats for being soft on communism. Finally, you had two generations of soldiers that had served overseas. Almost by definition they were going to be more willing to engage internationally and want to take active measures that they thought would prevent another war. And the economists wanted to take measures to prevent another great depression, which lends itself to establishing closer ties with economic partners. The US moving to the forefont of the global geopolitical arena was driven by forces characterized as a tidal wave rather than a current.
 
Top