AHC: American Neutrality in WWII

I think this may require several PoDs, perhaps some earlier than 1933, but here are the conditions:

  1. America may engage in hostilities elsewhere, but not in the European theatre.
  2. In terms of trade and sanctions, it will favour neither side officially,
  3. No Notzies. The same people are in charge of Germany and are enacting the same laws but, for whatever reason, this is seen merely as realpolitik.
Some ideas:
  1. Earlier hostilities in China, with Germany seen as allies in supporting the Nationalists.
  2. No Molotov/Ribbentrop pact
  3. A Soviet-backed Popular Front in Czechoslovakia?
 
I think this may require several PoDs, perhaps some earlier than 1933, but here are the conditions:

  1. America may engage in hostilities elsewhere, but not in the European theatre.
  2. In terms of trade and sanctions, it will favour neither side officially,
  3. No Notzies. The same people are in charge of Germany and are enacting the same laws but, for whatever reason, this is seen merely as realpolitik.
Some ideas:
  1. Earlier hostilities in China, with Germany seen as allies in supporting the Nationalists.
  2. No Molotov/Ribbentrop pact
  3. A Soviet-backed Popular Front in Czechoslovakia?
If Nazis are in charge, war with the USA was seen as inevitable and Japan as the logical ally
 
Germany doesn't back Japan? A Pacific War would break out but it wouldn't be "World War II," per se, unless public support for war against Germany grows.
 
Any Blunted Sickle-type scenario where Britain and France curbstomp the German army in 1940 or earlier will end up fulfilling this challenge by default, with no reason for the US to send troops to Europe.
 
UK refuses to pay in hard currency and military bases for US help.

Either the Nazis win, or the Soviets end up taking everything to the Spanish border. Even if the USSR still falls in 1991, Western Europe ends up much poorer.
 

thaddeus

Donor
it would require some major disagreement(s) between the US and UK for this scenario.

UK refuses to pay in hard currency and military bases for US help.

something more fundamental than aspects of the Destroyers-for-bases deal would be needed(?)

some treaty between Vichy France and the Nazi regime might be welcomed by the US but not the British.

continued German support for China while the USSR and Japan strike some kind of closer relations, the Nazi regime might be viewed as useful by the US?
 
The asteroid 69230 Hermes (a pair of quarter-mile wide rocks) slams into Ohio on Oct. 30 1937 (instead of narrowly missing Earth as in OTL) and knocks the U.S. out of the war.
 
Last edited:
How about this: Get rid of FDR before he starts antagonizing Germany. Policy remains "cash and carry" only. This would include Germany, if they could get to the US.

Japan probably still attacks Pearl Harbor, but Hitler doesn't feel the need to declare on the US, since there haven't been "Neutrality Patrols". With war in the Pacific, I would imagine that the US would probably refuse to sell anything to the European powers, in order to fuel their own war machine.
 
If America isn't in the war, it isn't a "World War" by definition.
Having said that, a "Germany goes East" scenario may be close to what you want. Germany goes to war against Russia (half-heartedly backed by UK and France, hoping the two powers grind each other down), while America stays neutral (and then fights in the Pacific only after Pearl Harbor). So not sure that's a "World War", but most of the world is at war, in some form or another.
 
Hitler wanted war with the USA. His main concern was the massive navy they had; he saw a naval war with Japan as the perfect way to tie up the American fleet. The OP question suffers from 2 issues:

If the same people are in charge, there is no real reason for any decisions to have been different.

And if the USA doesnt get involved...its not WWII
 
Last edited:
Top