It might of butterflied WW2, I agree. A punitive peace would have humbled Germany and prevent their war-making capabilities from advancing to the point where they attacked the Soviet Union and France again simultaneously in 1939. They darn near almost won to if it were not for French bravery. Only when the French surrounded the main German pocket in Belgium did Britain enter the war. This forced Germany to withdraw forces from the gates of Moscow to prevent invasion of their homeland.
DBWI: The Second Mexican American War Doesn't Happen?
- Thread starter ThatOneGuy
- Start date
- Status
It might of butterflied WW2, I agree. A punitive peace would have humbled Germany and prevent their war-making capabilities from advancing to the point where they attacked the Soviet Union and France again simultaneously in 1939. They darn near almost won to if it were not for French bravery. Only when the French surrounded the main German pocket in Belgium did Britain enter the war. This forced Germany to withdraw forces from the gates of Moscow to prevent invasion of their homeland.
Someone get this guy in touch with ISIS, remind them it is ASB to resist the US!
Already in TL bro.
Largest econoym in the world, sure they can.
Why did the British antagonize the Indians?
Very true, but it could have been part of avenging Mexican intransigence.
None of those countries border the US nor invaded them ATL.
CthulhuFhtagn
Banned
Two completely different situations. Mexico "causing problems" for the US would either mean attacking the US (which is what I was referring to when I said "ASB-induced insanity") or being too unstable to stop Pancho Villa-style raids.
I know bro. A Mexican invasion is the entire premise of this thread.
But it would be a massive drain on the economy for decades and decades. Even with a change in attitudes, why would the US be willing to fund something so costly when it would be easier to just take some territory in the north and call it a day?
Because the British Empire revolved around India. Also there was no single "Indian" language that English replaced during the BEI or the Raj, and India wasn't a unified state before the British took control.
So to "punish" them, the US government would waste an absurd amount of money to give them a modern educational system and teach them English (even though the Mexican people would just keep using Spanish anyway)?
Some of those countries were so close that they might as well have bordered the US. But much more importantly, those countries were very small. The combined land areas of Cuba, Haiti, Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Panama don't even come close to the total size of Mexico. So they were much easier to manage.
Tallest Skil
Banned
Why don’t we just establish this as the explanation?
Bingo.
Even today if you’re in the south and ask someone a question in Hindi, they’ll reply in English...
Its an interesting thing to assume. What if the US came in time to save the Ententes ass in WWI.
It would be GErmany that gets a harsh peace (from all plans discovered later) While France and Britain did not get harsh terms they were forsome time unable to pay back the US loans. the seizing of collateral and the economic trobles started by not getting the unsecured loans back pushed the US into GErmanys arms in the 30. So even if the war of 1939-41 (some call it the second world war) seemed to turn against the Central European alliance (Germany Poland and the Austria-Hungarian sucessor nations) after initial sucess, the stopid Japanese attack on P-H in 1940 brought the US into the war against the Brits (they should have dropped the Anglo Japanese alliance in the 20s). With the US and Germany fighting side by side it makes me wonder why they took until December 6th in 1941 to Force the Ententes capitulation.
But given the intensive US/German/Chinese trade relations it was only a matter of time until the US intervened in the Second Sino Japanese war - and that puts the Brits against the US - it would not have needed Yamamotos Folly.
It would be GErmany that gets a harsh peace (from all plans discovered later) While France and Britain did not get harsh terms they were forsome time unable to pay back the US loans. the seizing of collateral and the economic trobles started by not getting the unsecured loans back pushed the US into GErmanys arms in the 30. So even if the war of 1939-41 (some call it the second world war) seemed to turn against the Central European alliance (Germany Poland and the Austria-Hungarian sucessor nations) after initial sucess, the stopid Japanese attack on P-H in 1940 brought the US into the war against the Brits (they should have dropped the Anglo Japanese alliance in the 20s). With the US and Germany fighting side by side it makes me wonder why they took until December 6th in 1941 to Force the Ententes capitulation.
But given the intensive US/German/Chinese trade relations it was only a matter of time until the US intervened in the Second Sino Japanese war - and that puts the Brits against the US - it would not have needed Yamamotos Folly.
OOC: It has already been previously established that Germany "attacked the Soviet Union and France again simultaneously in 1939" but "the French surrounded the main German pocket in Belgium." It is implied that this was a reversal of German fortunes, because the British entered onto the side of the Entente. You would have to make it that the US declared against the Detente, but my previous post says the Germans "darn near almost won to if it were not for French bravery" which implies they lost.
OOC: my post does not contradict yours (initial sucesses then Brits and Germans pusshed back - if I understand correctly) but THEN afterwards the Japanese attacked the US which brought the US in - but as Japanese are allied with the Brits that makes the US allies (sort of) of Germany. And I established a reason why the US was estranged from the Entente.
Your oft-expressed jingoistic stance on this matter seems to make you yearn for this, but it simply isn't a realistic thing to have happened.
- Status