this topic may have been 'done to death', but there has never been a consensus on what would happen. Results range from 'it takes longer for the Allies to win' to 'Germany will win' and 'both sides are exhausted and sue for a mutual peace'.
A lot of amateur historians tend to think the only thing that matters in a war is the number of troops on the battlefield and ignore things like logistics and the national economy's capacity to support and carry on the war effort. That's why every couple weeks we have to explain to new posters why Germany couldn't pull off Sealion, Japan can't invade the US, etc. The US's physical battlefield contribution was minor, but the economic support provided to the Entente was enormous, and US entry was a major morale boost to Entente forces.Why would it go on longer? If Britain is no longer able to subsidise her continental allies, they'll be unlikely to last even as long as they did.
Is it my imagination, or is there a tendency in some quarters around here to try and handwave away the economic effects of US abstention, which are likely to be monumental?
this topic may have been 'done to death', but there has never been a consensus on what would happen. Results range from 'it takes longer for the Allies to win' to 'Germany will win' and 'both sides are exhausted and sue for a mutual peace'.
Without America (and I mean war entry with our troops), France and Britain are bled dry same as Germany. There is no miraculous last offensive that cracks the trenchline and leads onto Berlin. There may be revolutions and governments might fall. If this does not happen, then there is a negotiated peace with German troops still occupying significant parts of western Europe. In other words, a slight pro-Greman outcome of the negotiated peace treaty. And if Germany is very lucky, she looses all her colonies.