What if america joined the central powers
- Thread starter Cherico
- Start date
Well ignoring how this would even happen the Central Powers win no question the moral blow alone would be devastating on the Entente alone. Canada now is at war and has a majority of its troops in europe and while the American Army is small they have large reserves to draw feds troops from.
The Royal Navy is in severe trouble as they cant face the Americans in the open without leaving themselves wide open for the Germans and while the Japanese can help they are far from the beast that had the range to attack Hawaii in 1941.
All in all American entry would guarantee a Entente defeat.
The Royal Navy is in severe trouble as they cant face the Americans in the open without leaving themselves wide open for the Germans and while the Japanese can help they are far from the beast that had the range to attack Hawaii in 1941.
All in all American entry would guarantee a Entente defeat.
In OTL Lenin win,becouse Wall Street send Trocky with his thugs to made revolution.But since Winning Germany do not need soviets/they personally despised them/ now both Lenin and Trocky would get nothing,and Russia would be defeated normally.
So,defeated but democratic Russia with resentyment for loosing war and territories
/Poland as Germany client states they could stomatch,but they also made Ukraine and Belarussia.even now Russian considered them as lesser russian,in 1916 they would demand them back/
Such Russia would get its own Hitler and start WW2 with France and England wanting revenge.And Japan support.Of course,they would lost again - unless USA decide to do nothing.
Why? for example, Germany after WW1 would start making deals in South America,which made USA angry at them.And considering that Prussians never knew when to stop/with Bismarck excepcion/ they would certainly do so.
So,probably bloody war lost by Germany,but with weakened France and Russia.Result - after WW2 USA rule without competitors.
Buba
A total creep
The USA could had gone to war with the Entente in 1914 over the trampling of Neutral's rights. Just like in 1812.
However, America joins the Central Powers with WHAT exactly?
The US has no army to speak off and a middling navy. And it will have no army to speak off before 1919.
So, military action - besides the favourite of AH boards, i.e. invasion of Canada, is off the table.
The USA is blockaded by the RN from Bermuda, Halifax and Jamaica. Phillippines will be invaded by Japan (with UK funding).
IMO most of the effort wasted on the Ottomans (I'm speaking of Entente effectiveness in this regard, not of the purpose) will be diverted to the Caribean and Nova Scotia.
Hence the US is as good as an island, does not export anything anywhere, leading to very angry voters.
The Entente buys its grain and beef from Argentina (possibly other sources expanded - SA?), eats more rice from Asia. Japan makes even more money from its manufacturing, be it munitions or replacements for European exports.
The UK funds the war effort not with loans, but with Pound denominated bonds.
However, America joins the Central Powers with WHAT exactly?
The US has no army to speak off and a middling navy. And it will have no army to speak off before 1919.
So, military action - besides the favourite of AH boards, i.e. invasion of Canada, is off the table.
The USA is blockaded by the RN from Bermuda, Halifax and Jamaica. Phillippines will be invaded by Japan (with UK funding).
IMO most of the effort wasted on the Ottomans (I'm speaking of Entente effectiveness in this regard, not of the purpose) will be diverted to the Caribean and Nova Scotia.
Hence the US is as good as an island, does not export anything anywhere, leading to very angry voters.
The Entente buys its grain and beef from Argentina (possibly other sources expanded - SA?), eats more rice from Asia. Japan makes even more money from its manufacturing, be it munitions or replacements for European exports.
The UK funds the war effort not with loans, but with Pound denominated bonds.
ShadowLord
Well-known member
Short answer- money and supplies. Which in OTL got sent to the British and the French, not to mention the HUGE loans those nations took out from the USA and a lack of US reinforcements during the last years of the war.
Additionally, just because the USA can't invade, say Canada, at least not right away, doesn't mean that they can invade the USA. Not without diverting HUGE resources from the Western Front and the German Blockade. Even if the British and French choose not to invade the USA they'll need to divert substantial numbers of soldiers and ships just to keep the US bottled up. Ships and troops that, again will not be present to stop the High Seas Fleet or hold up the Western Front.
All of which would have disastrous butterfly effects on the War in Europe for the Triple Entente.
Buba
A total creep
Effects of hostile USA in 1914 are negligible. By 1915 the Entente will have workarounds.
IMO the money aspect is overblown. The British&French were running out of Dollars, not money as such - here they would not need Dollars as they would be buying from smaller, weaker suppliers who will accept Pounds and Franks.
However, I agree that butterflies are huge, with WWI ending in a negotiated peace and the A-H and Russian Empires surviving and thriving.
Biggest winner - Japan, as besides making money over fist as mini-USA replacement it'd would end up with the Phillippines on top of the ex-German colonies.
Biggest loser - USA, as it does not transform itself from a farm produce and raw materials exporter and capital and know how importer into the great power of OTL. Nor does it get to steal various German industrial patents ...
IMO the money aspect is overblown. The British&French were running out of Dollars, not money as such - here they would not need Dollars as they would be buying from smaller, weaker suppliers who will accept Pounds and Franks.
However, I agree that butterflies are huge, with WWI ending in a negotiated peace and the A-H and Russian Empires surviving and thriving.
Biggest winner - Japan, as besides making money over fist as mini-USA replacement it'd would end up with the Phillippines on top of the ex-German colonies.
Biggest loser - USA, as it does not transform itself from a farm produce and raw materials exporter and capital and know how importer into the great power of OTL. Nor does it get to steal various German industrial patents ...
IMO not a defeat but a not-victory, or at least nothing comparable to scale of OTL victory.
Last edited:
liberty90
Evil Neoliberal Cat
Your knowledge about economic history of the world is lacking. By 1900 the US was the largest producer and also the lowest cost producer of steel and heavy machinery.
Agreed, and while I admit the Entente could win without U.S. support them whining with the U.S. aligned against them is another thing entirely.
Basileus_Komnenos
Imperator Romanorum Βασιλεύς των Ρωμαίων
I doubt this. The Republic was pretty much doomed from the start due to the bad state Russia was in and the almost non-existent foundations it was built upon. As the Tsar was also alive and the Kaiserreich was the premier monarchical state in Europe, he'd be pushing for the Romanovs to be restored to their thrones. Nicholas was Wilhelm's cousin after all.
Honestly the Entente would probably still lose if the US stays neutral and instead in ttl is more German leaning than UK leaning. The Germans came close to taking Paris a couple times and the French army had begun to mutiny. The only reason why the Third Republic wasn't overthrown was because the mutinies weren't very well coordinated.
Without the news that the Americans are coming to save them, French morale would be much lower.
I doubt this part. The Germans came really close to winning the war prior to the US entry.
Buba
A total creep
I don't think the details of OTL 1917/18 events are pertinent, as up to that point the war had run with a pro-Entent neutral USA.
With a hostile USA since 1914 events would had run very differently. So there very well might had been no mutinies in the French army. Also, these mutinies were against attacking (stupidly).
With no sense of urgency - we must attack before the millions of Americans are ready to fight - would the Germans launch their hail Mary offensive of 1918? Would Russia had collapsed by then, allowing them to transfer all attack-capable formations from the East? No can tell ...
On one hand the USA at war with the Entente shows Italy what happens when a neutral, when the Paris-London axis demands that it jump, does not ask "how high?'. On the other hand fighting the "Americanos" draws off French and British strength, so it is prudent to sit on the sidelines and make money. Maybe Italy gets away with selling to both sides?
With a hostile USA since 1914 events would had run very differently. So there very well might had been no mutinies in the French army. Also, these mutinies were against attacking (stupidly).
With no sense of urgency - we must attack before the millions of Americans are ready to fight - would the Germans launch their hail Mary offensive of 1918? Would Russia had collapsed by then, allowing them to transfer all attack-capable formations from the East? No can tell ...
On one hand the USA at war with the Entente shows Italy what happens when a neutral, when the Paris-London axis demands that it jump, does not ask "how high?'. On the other hand fighting the "Americanos" draws off French and British strength, so it is prudent to sit on the sidelines and make money. Maybe Italy gets away with selling to both sides?
Last edited:
They might have done so in 1914, although reports differ but the 1916 strikes are a less certain factor. The French troops were refusing in most cases to attack. They were determined to still defend France against further German attacks and the Germans didn't have the capacity to inflict a decisively military victory in 1917. They only approached this in 1918 because Haig had so bloodied the British army during the Passchendaele 'campaign'.
The Republic in Russia would have faced serious problems but might have survived with a number of possible butterflies, although Germany's sealed train was a major blow as Lenin was willing to see Russia defeated to gain power.
Buba
A total creep
Hear! Hear!
With no "wait for Americans strategy", the French would had done something else. Like adopt "bite and hold" a year earlier?
An argument can be made that Passchendaele 'campaign' broke the back of the German army, as they oh-so ingeniously counterattacked against British artillery. The consensus seems to be that losses on both sides were more or less equal, the German Imperial army possibly suffering slightly more.
The capacity to inflict a decisively military victory came only with the transfer of troops freed by Russia's collapse. So it is the German army of the West which ended up gutted, not the British ...
It was Lloyd George who gutted the British army, denying replacements, hence the nine battalion Divisions.
This discussion has been ongoing for a century or so
Last edited:
Aaron Fox
Well-known member
The Entente was literally running on fumes by 1916/1917, Britain and France had already run through the vast majority of their financial reserves and that is with some loans to the Entente. If the US was hostile to the Entente, the Entente would quite literally run out of gas by 1916. The financial capability is simply isn't there. While Germany was hurting, it still had enough financial reserves to continue for another two years at the minimum and the only reason that it surrendered was that it didn't have any food.
US ports open to German ships would also make the RN sweat, as they can resupply there and use them as bases. The USN also kept the RN awake at night, only getting some sleep because they knew that Congress would fuck them over. That means Spee and friends would be heading to Hawaii and SanFran and get support from USN ships (and, make no mistake, the Standard family had some rather revolutionary features like the All or Nothing armor scheme). The RN feared the US coastline because both sides were ladened with spots for ambushes and locations for impromptu harbors. With Canada likely knocked out (thus the Canadian units not available), this causes all sorts of butterflies depending on when the US takes part in the war.
US ports open to German ships would also make the RN sweat, as they can resupply there and use them as bases. The USN also kept the RN awake at night, only getting some sleep because they knew that Congress would fuck them over. That means Spee and friends would be heading to Hawaii and SanFran and get support from USN ships (and, make no mistake, the Standard family had some rather revolutionary features like the All or Nothing armor scheme). The RN feared the US coastline because both sides were ladened with spots for ambushes and locations for impromptu harbors. With Canada likely knocked out (thus the Canadian units not available), this causes all sorts of butterflies depending on when the US takes part in the war.
Knowledgeispower
Ah I love the smell of missile spam in the morning
And then we have to account for the fact that a US at war in 1914 will pass something decently larger than the 1916 naval program two years earlier and unlike otl the capital ship and cruiser production won't be delayed
Buba
A total creep
The Entente in 1917 was running on fumes of its ability to obtain Dollars. In this scenario there is no need for Dollars, as the UK/France make stuff at home or buy abroad for Pounds/Franks.
Germany and A-H somehow made it without US loans and supplies to 1918 ...
The naval war indeed might be interesting. Nevertheless I imagine the US to be pushed back to Hawaii after losing Phillippines to Japan, while in the Atlantic ... convoy battles to Halifax/St.John? The Carribean is red with blood?
BTW - are German warships even capable of reaching the USA at economic speed? What if they have to leg it - i.e. they spot that they had been spotted - when passing the GIUK gap?
Germany and A-H somehow made it without US loans and supplies to 1918 ...
The naval war indeed might be interesting. Nevertheless I imagine the US to be pushed back to Hawaii after losing Phillippines to Japan, while in the Atlantic ... convoy battles to Halifax/St.John? The Carribean is red with blood?
BTW - are German warships even capable of reaching the USA at economic speed? What if they have to leg it - i.e. they spot that they had been spotted - when passing the GIUK gap?
Last edited:
Aaron Fox
Well-known member
No, that was with American loans, not alone. By 1917, the Entente was running on fumes despite American financial support. Britain and France were literally starting to run out of things to put up as collateral for the loans.
Given what the German Navy outside of Germany did despite not having safe ports in the US (a lot of hell marry chases across several oceans)? I wouldn't be surprised that if the US joined the Central Powers and the various colonial squadrons caught wind of it, then you would see the Germans heading towards the Philipines for a refuel before heading towards Hawaii and SanFran. Then add to the fact that the U-Boats now effectively have bases in the US that they can head to for resupply...
Also, the mere threat of the USN raiding the convoys would force the Home Fleet to be split to cover a now unsecured supply line, making a High Seas Fleet Breakout that much easier.
Hear! Hear!
With no "wait for Americans strategy", the French would had done something else. Like adopt "bite and hold" a year earlier?
An argument can be made that Passchendaele 'campaign' broke the back of the German army, as they oh-so ingeniously counterattacked against British artillery. The consensus seems to be that losses on both sides were more or less equal, the German Imperial army possibly suffering slightly more.
The capacity to inflict a decisively military victory came only with the transfer of troops freed by Russia's collapse. So it is the German army of the West which ended up gutted, not the British ...
It was Lloyd George who gutted the British army, denying replacements, hence the nine battalion Divisions.
This discussion has been ongoing for a century or so
It damaged the German army but both in terms of blood and morale it damaged the British army more. Haig's refusal to consider limited bite and hold actions, which would have done a lot more damage to the Germans when they counter-attacked and saved a lot of British/Imperial lives was the deadly factor. His chasing of the chimera of a decisive breakthrough by simple repeated frontal attack was the damaging factor.
Lloyd George holding back units in Britain did make the German offensive a bit more effective but given the support for Haig in the Conservatives and royal family that was the only way to stop yet another frontal assault by Haig. By the summer Britain had the capacity against a gravely weakened German army to make decisive breakthroughs, despite Haig's earlier attempts to throw away resources - both infantry and armour. As early as spring 1917 the bite and hold idea had been shown as very effective but Haig simply refused to use it.
I have read that Foch actually used such a method in a relatively small operation in 1916/17. When some of his fellow officers complained that with the small amount of ground 'liberated' it would take something like 2,000 such operations to clear the Germans from France he pointed to the German casualties and that it would take IIRC ~80 such operations to totally destroy the entire German army. Unfortunately both British and French high commands paid no attention.
Steve
Very little as it lacks the range, especially in escort and scout units, to do anything.
Of course if for some reason the US went rabidly anti-entente even as early as 1914 it would end up as a German victory but that would be against US as well as everybody else's interesting other than the members of the central powers. It might not be as easy as some are thinking given how limited the US military was in 1914 but sheer weight of numbers makes it pretty much inevitable.
Buba
A total creep
I've given a POD - in 1914 Wilson stands up for the rights of Neutrals.
Briths/French "rules of blockade" had been concocted in the early hours of the day they were announced and contravened what the UK championed in the 19th century ...
In OTL, due to his need for votes from the SOuth, the Wilson administration demanded that cotton be let through to Germany.
The navy was decent, even if lacking in light units. But these can be built relatively quickly.
The state of the US army is best left unmentioned. It would be a mob armed with rifles up to at least 1917 if not longer. And even when given artillery it would carry out human wave attacks like in OTL 1918.