Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

Reader mode
Zyobot said:
'US Remembers WWII Japan As Worse Than Nazi Germany'.

*Unit 731 has entered the chat.*
Click to expand...
Dude, that's super-easy. Hitler just has to not be a complete idiot who declares war on the USA, and has to instead drop Japan like a brick the moment he hears about Pearl Harbor. Result: Roosevelt gets the war he wanted, but just against the Japanese. No war between Germany and the USA. However, the USA does economically support Hitler's enemies, because they still don't like Hitler one bit.

The outcome is that the USA never fights Germany, so all the trauma the USA experiences is associated with Japan. Hitler is still as horrible as ever, but this is more of a "distant" thing, to Americans. Hitler also gets defeated by the USSR in due time. And the USSR is a wreck afterwards... but does have control over all of Europe. Which it ruthlessly loots. A Cold War still happens, and since the USA never fought Hitler but considers the USSR the 'Evil Empire', they tend to view Hitler as 'less bad' by comparison.

Basically, Hitler's atrocities are brushed under the carpet while Stalin's are high-lighted. The exact reverse of OTL.

Meanwhile, without Hitler to hog the "attention", the USA views Japan as the big enemy of the 1940s, and accounts of their atrocities are in every school-book. No need to go soft on them, either, because without a European theatre, the USA can move right into China. They bolster the Nationalists and turn China into an ally against the USSR. Japan isn't needed as a key ally in the region, so there's no need to play soft-ball with them.
 
Last edited:
Skallagrim said:
Dude, that's super-easy. Hitler just has to not be a complete idiot who declares war on the USA, and who instead drops Japan like a brick the moment he hears about Pearl Harbor. Result: Roosevelt gets the war he wanted, but just against the Japanese. No war between Germany and the USA. However, the USA does economically support Hitler's enemies, because they still don't like Hitler one bit.

The outcome is that the USA never fights Germany, so all the trauma the USA experiences is associated with Japan. Hitler is still as horrible as ever, but this is more of a "distant" thing, to Americans. Hitler also gets defeated by the USSR in due time. And the USSR is a wreck afterwards... but does have control over all of Europe. Which it ruthlessly loots. A Cold War still happens, and since the USA never fought Hitler but considers the USSR the 'Evil Empire', they tend to view Hitler as 'less bad' by comparison.

Basically, Hitler's atrocities are brushed under the carpet while Stalin's are high-lighted. The exact reverse of OTL.

Meanwhile, without Hitler to hog the "attention", the USA views Japan as the big enemy of the 1940s, and accounts of their atrocities are in every school-book. No need to go soft on them, either, because without a European theatre, the USA can move right into China. They bolster the Nationalists and turn China into an ally against the USSR. Japan isn't needed for as a key ally in the region, so there's no need to play soft-ball with them.
Click to expand...

Skallagrim

One question. Given that the Soviets will have most of Europe - possibly not all - and the sheer amount of propaganda put forward to support Stalin's empire plus the probable very heavy losses in the war against Japan is the US willing to support Britain, which would be largely alone, in opposing Soviet expansion in the old hemisphere or would it slip into isolationism. Or only be concerned with its economic interests in the Americas and East Asia? At least probably until the Soviets also get the bomb which might make the US think again.

Steve
 
stevep said:
Skallagrim

One question. Given that the Soviets will have most of Europe - possibly not all - and the sheer amount of propaganda put forward to support Stalin's empire plus the probable very heavy losses in the war against Japan is the US willing to support Britain, which would be largely alone, in opposing Soviet expansion in the old hemisphere or would it slip into isolationism. Or only be concerned with its economic interests in the Americas and East Asia? At least probably until the Soviets also get the bomb which might make the US think again.

Steve
Click to expand...
I think they'd be quite prepared to support Britain -- and possibly Francoist Spain, and Portugal -- as bulwarks against the USSR.

It would be impossible not to see that the enormous, but bloodied and vengeful USSR is going to be a huge threat. Without a good reason to fight in Europe, though, all FDR can do is ensure that at least some Western Allies are helped enough to keep them standing.

"Containment" is going to be the key concept right from the start, I'd guess.

(Regarding pro-soviet propaganda: that didn't mean much after the war in OTL. I don't see it meaning much here, either.)
 
Also, if there are any US military women (in supporting roles, presumably) captured by the Japanese, then have the Japanese rape them in order to assert their dominance and masculinity and to end the stereotype of sexually impotent Asian men!
 
WolfBear

I think both massacres and rapes would have occurred. It was pretty much standard operational practice for the IJA at this point.

IIRC Unit 731 did perform some experiments on western POWs, probably including Americans and in a larger Us-Japan war I would expect this to definitely be the case. The wiki entry includes the paragraph:

According to A. S. Wells, the majority of victims were Chinese[29] with a lesser percentage being Russian, Mongolian, and Korean. They may also have included a small number of European, American, Indian, Australian and New Zealander prisoners of war.[71][72][73][74] A member of the Yokusan Sonendan paramilitary political youth branch who worked for Unit 731 stated that not only were Chinese, Russians, and Koreans present, but also Americans, British, and French people.[75] Sheldon H. Harris documented that the victims were generally political dissidents, communist sympathizers, ordinary criminals, impoverished civilians, and the mentally disabled.[76] Author Seiichi Morimura estimates that almost 70% of the victims who died in the Pingfang camp were Chinese (both military and civilian),[77] while close to 30% of the victims were Russian.[78]
Click to expand...

In this case and especially if the US is able to establish a friendly China then it would have no need for good relations with Japan and attempts at such are likely to upset China, Korea and other nations affected by the Japanese occupation. In that case there's no great need to cover up Japanese atrocities and things like Unit 731 would probably be highlighted.
 
Skallagrim said:
I think they'd be quite prepared to support Britain -- and possibly Francoist Spain, and Portugal -- as bulwarks against the USSR.

It would be impossible not to see that the enormous, but bloodied and vengeful USSR is going to be a huge threat. Without a good reason to fight in Europe, though, all FDR can do is ensure that at least some Western Allies are helped enough to keep them standing.

"Containment" is going to be the key concept right from the start, I'd guess.

(Regarding pro-soviet propaganda: that didn't mean much after the war in OTL. I don't see it meaning much here, either.)
Click to expand...

Probably supporting Britain as it was be very useful to them but supporting fascist states could be politically explosive.

Given the level of propaganda used to present the Soviets as good guys and that there's not going to be something like the Berlin blockade I'm not so sure that the Us would move that quickly to see the Soviet occupation of continental Europe as a serious threat, at least for some time. It took until the invasion of S Korea, having had clashes in Europe and the loss of China before the US finally accepted the idea of having to really stand up to the USSR OTL so it could be a bit latter here unless Stalin does something really stupid.

The areas that might stay outside Soviet control might be the Nordic area. At least Sweden and Norway and possibly Denmark if allied forces can get there in time. Difficult to say on Finland in such a scenario. It might survive as OTL as the Soviets are going to be even more bloodied here.
 
Skallagrim said:
I think they'd be quite prepared to support Britain -- and possibly Francoist Spain, and Portugal -- as bulwarks against the USSR.

It would be impossible not to see that the enormous, but bloodied and vengeful USSR is going to be a huge threat. Without a good reason to fight in Europe, though, all FDR can do is ensure that at least some Western Allies are helped enough to keep them standing.

"Containment" is going to be the key concept right from the start, I'd guess.

(Regarding pro-soviet propaganda: that didn't mean much after the war in OTL. I don't see it meaning much here, either.)
Click to expand...

Add Sweden and MAYBE Italy.But Germany,France,Belgium,Holland - gulags everywhere.At least,there woud be less idiots beliving in communism there.
Becouse Italy would be probably taken,we would have pope in Spain or South America.No catholics supporting commies later.
 
Skallagrim said:
Dude, that's super-easy. Hitler just has to not be a complete idiot who declares war on the USA, and has to instead drop Japan like a brick the moment he hears about Pearl Harbor. Result: Roosevelt gets the war he wanted, but just against the Japanese. No war between Germany and the USA. However, the USA does economically support Hitler's enemies, because they still don't like Hitler one bit.

The outcome is that the USA never fights Germany, so all the trauma the USA experiences is associated with Japan. Hitler is still as horrible as ever, but this is more of a "distant" thing, to Americans. Hitler also gets defeated by the USSR in due time. And the USSR is a wreck afterwards... but does have control over all of Europe. Which it ruthlessly loots. A Cold War still happens, and since the USA never fought Hitler but considers the USSR the 'Evil Empire', they tend to view Hitler as 'less bad' by comparison.

Basically, Hitler's atrocities are brushed under the carpet while Stalin's are high-lighted. The exact reverse of OTL.

Meanwhile, without Hitler to hog the "attention", the USA views Japan as the big enemy of the 1940s, and accounts of their atrocities are in every school-book. No need to go soft on them, either, because without a European theatre, the USA can move right into China. They bolster the Nationalists and turn China into an ally against the USSR. Japan isn't needed as a key ally in the region, so there's no need to play soft-ball with them.
Click to expand...

Would the USSR have actually been able to conquer all of Europe without D-Day?
 
stevep said:
WolfBear

I think both massacres and rapes would have occurred. It was pretty much standard operational practice for the IJA at this point.

IIRC Unit 731 did perform some experiments on western POWs, probably including Americans and in a larger Us-Japan war I would expect this to definitely be the case. The wiki entry includes the paragraph:



In this case and especially if the US is able to establish a friendly China then it would have no need for good relations with Japan and attempts at such are likely to upset China, Korea and other nations affected by the Japanese occupation. In that case there's no great need to cover up Japanese atrocities and things like Unit 731 would probably be highlighted.
Click to expand...

In such a scenario, I wonder if Japan would have gotten cleansed of its militaristic attitude much more thoroughly in the post-WWII years and decades so that Japan wouldn't be making excuses for its WWII atrocities right now like it sometimes does in real life. :(

'AHC: Independent Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts without the 2014 Maidan Revolution in Ukraine'
 
Buba said:
Don't count on it.
Look no further than the current Heresiarch ... a term used for Jorge Bergoglio by a news site I follow :)
Click to expand...

If commies made pope run to South America,then no.Most of those Heresiarchs come from western Europe,which would be in soviet hands.They could be red priest there,but not part of Church.
All cardinals,or almost all,would be crusaders for next 200 years,even when communism finally would fall.
Buba said:
Absolutely not.
By 1944 the SU had wasted its manpower and was running on fumes. It was winning battles with artillery while infantry was kept at 50-60% strength with recruits from "liberated" areas.
Click to expand...

True,but soviets have smart commander,like Koniew,not only butchers like Zhukow.Sralin would simply relieve those butchers from their commands,and eventually win.
Germans would still be bombed by USA,and could not send all dyvisions from France to fight soviets.

But - it would be interesting for warfare,germans would use more jets/soviets would take them after victory/ , and E-50 and E-75 tanks.Both planes and tanks would be most modern now.

P.S When germany would be mostly taken,Allies would land in France,so,sadly,that nice country would not knew what soviet rule means.But germans,belgians and mybe dutch would be fucked.In case of womans - literally.
 
ATP said:
If commies made pope run to South America,then no.Most of those Heresiarchs come from western Europe,which would be in soviet hands.They could be red priest there,but not part of Church.
All cardinals,or almost all,would be crusaders for next 200 years,even when communism finally would fall.


True,but soviets have smart commander,like Koniew,not only butchers like Zhukow.Sralin would simply relieve those butchers from their commands,and eventually win.
Germans would still be bombed by USA,and could not send all dyvisions from France to fight soviets.

But - it would be interesting for warfare,germans would use more jets/soviets would take them after victory/ , and E-50 and E-75 tanks.Both planes and tanks would be most modern now.

P.S When germany would be mostly taken,Allies would land in France,so,sadly,that nice country would not knew what soviet rule means.But germans,belgians and mybe dutch would be fucked.In case of womans - literally.
Click to expand...

Do you mean the UK as the PoD is that the US only ends up at war with Japan.
 
stevep said:
Do you mean the UK as the PoD is that the US only ends up at war with Japan.
Click to expand...

Indeed.RAF was quite good from 1943.But,with England alone,they woud probably take only part of France before soviets come,and without USA help would be overrun quickly.
Most likely outcome - East and West France.
 
WolfBear said:
'AHC: Some Allied country other than Poland also gets vast amounts of Lebensraum after the Allied victory in World War II'

(Poland's post-World War II Lebensraum was, of course, the Recovered Territories: Recovered Territories - Wikipedia)
Click to expand...

Probably the USSR?

I know it set up likeminded puppet states rather than annexing Eastern Europe wholesale, though I suppose angering the West is what kept Stalin from doing the latter.
 
Zyobot said:
Probably the USSR?

I know it set up likeminded puppet states rather than annexing Eastern Europe wholesale, though I suppose angering the West is what kept Stalin from doing the latter.
Click to expand...

The USSR did get some Lebensraum, specifically Kaliningrad Oblast (and of course Memel). But getting more Lebensraum would have mostly meant taking it from Allied peoples such as the Poles, Slovaks, and Romanians (who switched sides in 1944).
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top