Redcoat
Banned
I was looking around the Wikipedia when I found this article on this scenario the military created during the Depression. Assuming this doesn't turn into War Plan Red-Orange (With Japan involved), what could feasibly happen?
WI: War Plan Red actually happened.
- Thread starter Redcoat
- Start date
Redcoat
Banned
Wouldn't get involved on the British side I meant. They'd either take advantage of the war to take territory or join the US's side. Red-Orange seems like too easy a win for the Brits and Japanese.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
Well, the plan was only approved as an actual US military strategy in 1930, and I'm going to presume its taking place before WW II breaks out in Europe, so sometime in the mid-30's seems the most likely, and we can say for certain in that case prep is only 5-7 years or so... for the sake of giving Old George and his subjects a fair chance let's assume that either basic espionage reveals the building up of airfields along the American-Canadian border or the plan is leaked within a year or so.
As for why... well, I don't know. You have any ideas?
Redcoat
Banned
I found this in a search.
https://www.alternatehistory.com/fo...attempting-to-de-asb-ify-war-plan-red.378758/
For a plausible scenario. Shame this wasn't made into a TL.
I know you meant the British side but it makes a lot more sense that they'd take the opportunity to grab the Philippines.
Redcoat
Banned
That would make more sense. But maybe the U.S. could negotiate their way out or something. That post I mentioned got the Japanese out of the picture or joining the Americans, and it seems plausible enough imo.
5-7 years of prep?
'kay, Britain's screwed. The big weakness of the United States historically, and this is true all the way up to WWII was its tiny military, and demilitarized industry. With 5 years of tensions building into open war all that goes out the window. When war with Britain is clearly over the horizon the US Navy will be givne top priority, and the sheer scale of American industry will drown the Royal Navy in ships.
I expect Britain would follow their version of the plan, which is "screw Canada, save the Empire."
The British fleet isn't going to its death in a battle it can't win, so expect it to utilize the larger reach of the Empire to harass American trade and territories in order to push the Americans to the negotiating table. Not that I expect that will be hard. This isn't a life and death struggle, and it won't be a surprise attack the way Pearl Harbor was, most likely anyway. This will be a limited war over influence in the Pacific and in North America. Canada will likely fight, in the vain hope rescue will come, but when it becomes obvious that London isn't interested in throwing soldiers away on a lost cause the government isn't likely to continue.
As for territory shifting hands, I wouldn't be surprised if some of the smaller American islands in the Pacific get swapped to Britain in exchange for giving Canada independence (American annexation isn't really something that is realistic IMO, in part because it makes the whole thing look very imperialistic), and possibly British islands in the Carribean (though giving the RN rights to fuel and supply in those ports. The US possibly pays the British for all of this to give it the air of purchase rather than conquest. Five years later everyone is back to, "wait, why were we fighting again?"
So in short, I expect the war to be an overall American victory, but one in which neither side actually loses much. There might be one or two fleet battles, but I doubt either side is going to be willing to throw much of their fleets away in such a pointless endeavor.
Most of the major fighting is reserved for assaults on islands (with large numbers of prisoners taken without the kill or be killed mentality of the Pacific), and in Canada (which is too big and too thinly populated for something like trench warfare.)
The article seems to be short on research. There were versions of Plan Red pre 1910. This & the other Color Plans were developed after the Spanish American war demonstrated a complete lack of war planning and preparation by both the War and Navy Depts. Intially they were brief outlines to be used as a basis for general defense preparation, and eventual mobilization plans. Plan Black = Germany was pulled out of the file and read before current mobilization plans were written 1916-1917. I am unsure if WP Green was written before 1914, or later as a result of the 1914 & 1916 invasions of Mexico. WP Orange was the only plan seriously developed over three decades. After the war scare of 1907 the US Navy took the idea of war with Japan seriously & spent a lot of its training and staff time in fleet and map exercises, staff studies, and student papers picking over WP Orange in increasing detail. How Nimitz & King executed the Pacific War & in particular the central Pacific offensive had roots reaching back to 1907 & had been pretty well worked out in by the mid 1930s.
While the War Plans Division of the War Dept & its equivalent in the Navy had final say over the content of these plans a lot of the work was done by other groups. The Staff and Command College at Levenworth, the Naval War College, the Army War College, the Joint Army/navy Board. and various operational staffs. Thus the mid level & senior officers had some actual hands on contact with the Color Plans, vs reading a finished product in a secure office somewhere.
Warplan Red was as it names suggests, just a plan. It pays to be prepared and planning invasions is a good tool to promote creative thinking for office staff, its like how America has plans to fight zombies and girl scouts. It wasnt envisioned to actually be put into action and the US short of Britain suddenly turning hostile had no real intention of using it. War plan orange as discussed was gamed much more as hostilities with Japan appeared necessary as relations soured.
Redcoat
Banned
Would France join the American side? Would Germany join with Britain? (If America and the UK can go to war, it's also about as likely as an Anglo-German alliance.) Germany saw the long-term enemy after the Soviets as America, so he might just see this as the opportunity to stop the Americans. And if France sides with America, two birds and one stone. There may not be a World War 2 like OTL for obvious reasons. This will be the World War 2.
Napoleonrules
Banned
We do need to understand WHY War Plan Red existed- to give the Army something to play with in war games and keep the lower officer ranks working on logistics and something that could exercise their brains for a real plan writing for a real war. It was specifically banned that they use Germany at one point and therefore- Plan Red was used and updated rather than Plan Black (the color for US war plans against Germany). Secondly- Britain had their own plan, as mentioned was screw Canada, and then it wasn't even "blockade the US" which is impossible at this point, it was to keep the fleet home and along trade routes to the colonies. No intention of going up against the US navy, which had no intention of going up against the British either other than to blockade them from going to Canada (which the British weren't going to do) and maybe harass some trade routes to the West Indies. Canada is doooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooomed. Even the Canadian war plans separate from Britain's said "we're going to do an air assault and land forces to occupy Seattle, Minneapolis, and Albany and hope this distracts them from doing an offensive against us"... in which case this US-British war at that point becomes Canadian Bacon and John Candy saves the US by making all sides laugh and we forget the war.
Plausibility is naturally out of the window with any War Plan Red scenario, it makes sense that the Japanese would jump in on Britain's side if it came to fruition. If the US has made some sort of deal with Japan then you'll need to elaborate on why exactly the US is at war with the UK in the first place.
The US "needs" the money owed by the UK and the best way to achieve that is to cut-off all trade with not only the British Empire but the entire Commonwealth?
Remember, global economics works like owing a drug dealer money.
Last edited:
War Plan Red is reasonably well-known here in CRIMSON; I first saw the article quite a while ago. My personal version of the war is fairly simple; either my parents or grandparents find a big old American flag to celebrate the liberation from British tyranny, or I don't exist. I'm in the Niagara area, which is mentioned several times for its power plants, industry and delicious fruit.
I don't think that much would change if the plan were leaked. Maybe the US would abandon their plans for Halifax and be satisfied with cutting the link between Nova Scotia and central Canada by taking Moncton. The other major offensives would remain the same, especially in Ontario. In fact, I can't think of a large territory anywhere that has the invasion routes so set in stone as Ontario. There are four points -- the east (across the St. Lawrence), the Niagara peninsula, the Windsor area, and the Sault-Ste-Marie area. (The land borders in northwestern Ontario don't lead to anything worth taking.) The obvious areas of strategic value are, like the various river crossings, never going to change. BLUE will not be able to surprise CRIMSON at any specific point, but CRIMSON will not be able to resist BLUE at any of those very obvious points.
The Canadian counterpart of War Plan Red is absurdly ambitious, considering it's based on an offensive strategy. I suppose the idea is to delay the invaders long enough to allow British reinforcements to come in at Halifax and through a still-intact railroad system. Doing this with a desperate delaying action might work; doing this by offensives against four choice American cities could never work.
I imagine a UK-USA war in the 1930s would have unfolded very much along the lines of the plan. As I've said, there are only so many strategic targets and only so many ways for BLUE to get there, especially with a 1930s road network in the two countries. Parts might be left out and parts might be added, of course. I don't see a poison gas attack on Halifax as likely, though. That would galvanize Canadians to fight to the bitter end against the US, while simply taking Halifax in the ordinary manner (or with some coup de main attack) might well result in Canadians failing to resist in many places. Though Canada was more British in the 1930s than it is today, Canada has always been a rather American country (sorry), and the order of the day would be "better BLUE than dead," unless the Americans began to commit atrocities.
War Plan Red-Orange would add major wrinkles to the Canadian campaign. I suspect efforts against the Pacific coast would be stepped up at the expense of offensives in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. This would secure Vancouver/Victoria for possible use against ORANGE and would protect against an invasion, if ORANGE is capable of doing that ITTL. The biggest difference would be in naval warfare and I suspect the 1930s-era BLUE navy would need to decide between "ORANGE first" and "RED first." I think they'd pick RED.
I don't think that much would change if the plan were leaked. Maybe the US would abandon their plans for Halifax and be satisfied with cutting the link between Nova Scotia and central Canada by taking Moncton. The other major offensives would remain the same, especially in Ontario. In fact, I can't think of a large territory anywhere that has the invasion routes so set in stone as Ontario. There are four points -- the east (across the St. Lawrence), the Niagara peninsula, the Windsor area, and the Sault-Ste-Marie area. (The land borders in northwestern Ontario don't lead to anything worth taking.) The obvious areas of strategic value are, like the various river crossings, never going to change. BLUE will not be able to surprise CRIMSON at any specific point, but CRIMSON will not be able to resist BLUE at any of those very obvious points.
The Canadian counterpart of War Plan Red is absurdly ambitious, considering it's based on an offensive strategy. I suppose the idea is to delay the invaders long enough to allow British reinforcements to come in at Halifax and through a still-intact railroad system. Doing this with a desperate delaying action might work; doing this by offensives against four choice American cities could never work.
I imagine a UK-USA war in the 1930s would have unfolded very much along the lines of the plan. As I've said, there are only so many strategic targets and only so many ways for BLUE to get there, especially with a 1930s road network in the two countries. Parts might be left out and parts might be added, of course. I don't see a poison gas attack on Halifax as likely, though. That would galvanize Canadians to fight to the bitter end against the US, while simply taking Halifax in the ordinary manner (or with some coup de main attack) might well result in Canadians failing to resist in many places. Though Canada was more British in the 1930s than it is today, Canada has always been a rather American country (sorry), and the order of the day would be "better BLUE than dead," unless the Americans began to commit atrocities.
War Plan Red-Orange would add major wrinkles to the Canadian campaign. I suspect efforts against the Pacific coast would be stepped up at the expense of offensives in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta. This would secure Vancouver/Victoria for possible use against ORANGE and would protect against an invasion, if ORANGE is capable of doing that ITTL. The biggest difference would be in naval warfare and I suspect the 1930s-era BLUE navy would need to decide between "ORANGE first" and "RED first." I think they'd pick RED.
The notion of going to war to recover debt is often touted but it fundamentally flawed and really misunderstands the debt crisis in the 30's. You cant just "go to war to get debts back", especially when all your own banking institutions are going belly up one after the other (related to an overuse of Credit during the roaring twenties by consumers and farmers within the United States) with little prospect of bailout by the US government until it was too late. US economic policy at the time was very hands off and they tried to allow private industries, local governments and banks to try and fix the issue. Remember, these very same banks were the ones loaning money to Germany who in turn was paying money to Britain and France who paid war debts back to the United States (yeah its trucking weird but that'show it worked). When American Credit dried up, the European economies began to tank so people started buy less American goods. America enacted trade tariffs to discourage American citizens from buying European products in an attempt to protect the US industries (well intentioned but ultimately retarded move), but this was met with trade tariffs from Europe which means less trade which means less people buying things, which leads to more lay offs, less jobs and sky rocketing unemployment. A war would only make it worse. Like exponentially worse, you can't loot countries when everyone is broke.
I think if you want a US-British war utilizing a War Plan Red scenario you need the governments of either country to become monumentally stupid very quickly (like Nazi levels of shortsightedness). Maybe Britain goes fascist following the war somehow, perhaps a right wing backlash against leftist movements being more aggressive after the war (hard) or have the US somehow fall to quasi fascist authoritarianism in the 20's (even harder).
Last edited: