US Left 'Til Last in WW2

[dualshock71]

I've been thinking about this one for a while now, and now I want to ask what you guys think.

In this timeline, Pearl Harbor never happens. The Japanese realize that they might not be able to handle us and decide to take a less suicidal target.

The US is not drawn into the war and takes an isolationist approach to the war. Much of the world is under Axis control, sans North America and the parts of Central America closest to the US.

Would the Axis set their sites of the United States? Would they fight each other? Would they just be content to sit with what they had?

I personally think that the Axis would build up its strength and strike at the US, but...your opinions?

 

[Wolf]

We'd wind up with a Proteus Operation scenario wear the enitre worl except, N. America and Anzac is fascist.

 

[CalBear]

I've been thinking about this one for a while now, and now I want to ask what you guys think.

In this timeline, Pearl Harbor never happens. The Japanese realize that they might not be able to handle us and decide to take a less suicidal target.

The US is not drawn into the war and takes an isolationist approach to the war. Much of the world is under Axis control, sans North America and the parts of Central America closest to the US.

Would the Axis set their sites of the United States? Would they fight each other? Would they just be content to sit with what they had?

I personally think that the Axis would build up its strength and strike at the US, but...your opinions?

The POD has been done, several times, with varying degrees of success. The biggest problems with this version, which otherwise is pretty reasonable, and all other similar PODs are

1. The U.S. was, effectively, at war with Germany since early 1941, when the U.S. took over escort of convoys all the way to Iceland, with the first American attack on a German boat in April of 1941 (and the USS Reuben James was sunk in October '41 by a U-boat.).

2. If the U.S. only has control over North America and PART of Central America that means that the Axis has attacked South America and the rest of Central America. Even an isolationist America would react to Western Hemisphere attacks, especially as the approached the Canal.

Just no chance that the U.S. stays out the war once the Western Hemisphere is struck.

 

[Shimbo]

FDR was determined to get into the war and Churchill was determined to drag the USA in by any means necessary. IMO if Pearl Harbor hadn't happened FDR would have continued the undeclared naval war in the Atlantic until the Germans bit and gave him a casus belli.

So what I'm saying is IMO your PoD would not stop US participation in WW2. If you want to keep the USA isolationist IMO your PoD must involve eliminating FDR as President.

As for 'no USA participation = Nazi world domination", I disagree.

The Soviets stopped the German assault on Moscow long before US Lend Lease started helping them. I can't see the course of the Battle of Stalingrad changing because the USA was not at war. IMO the Soviets would have beaten the Germans without US help, although it would have taken them longer.

Also the British had also proven themselves invulnerable to invasion before the US became involved in the war, so they aren't going to fall under German domination if the USA doesn't enter the war.

IMO no US involvement in the war would have lead to the Soviets dominating Europe up to the French and Italian borders. France and Italy would IMO have been liberated by British/Empire troops following Churchill's strategy of biding his time until the Soviets had gutted the German army.

 

[Superdude]

IMO no US involvement in the war would have lead to the Soviets dominating Europe up to the French and Italian borders.

Without Lend Lease, and American arms tying up German forces, isn't it possible for Germany to get a negotiated peace with the Soviets?

Without the United States, is Britain going to invade Italy successfully, or at all?

 

[Typo]

without the US you'd probably have a war resulting in a German dominiated eastern Europe at best (maybe with a rump Russia), at worst you'd have German annexation of much of USSR.

 

[Shimbo]

Without the United States, is Britain going to invade Italy successfully, or at all?

I'm proposing that in this scenario the British/Empire would invade Italy and France only when the Germans are already on the ropes.

Without Lend Lease, and American arms tying up German forces, isn't it possible for Germany to get a negotiated peace with the Soviets?

and

without the US you'd probably have a war resulting in a German dominiated eastern Europe at best (maybe with a rump Russia), at worst you'd have German annexation of much of USSR.

American support to the Soviets (lend lease) was simply not a major factor for the Soviet war machine until 1943. The Soviets had already won at Stalingrad at that point and the long slow retreat of the German army had begun. Lend-lease speeded up the Soviet advance, but it would still have happened IMO.

 

[Typo]

I thought US loans and such significantly helped the USSR with their overused infrastructure after Moscow.

 

[Shimbo]

I thought US loans and such significantly helped the USSR with their overused infrastructure after Moscow.

Definitely, and I'm not denigrating lend-lease at all, but it took time to be delivered and used, and IIRC by the time significant quantities had been delivered, the Battle of Stalingrad, for example, had already taken place. So lend-lease sped up the Soviet advance, but it was helpful rather than decisive to the Soviet victory over the Germans.

 

[Mr_ Bondoc]

Something To Consider...

Something that could make things interesting is the collapse of Axis within. Consider the following PODs. Just because the colonial governments have collapsed doesn't mean the violence will stop:

-Mao Tse-tung, Chiang Kai-shek, and Lin Biao have been actively fighting in China against the Japanese since 1936. Under these circumstances, Emperor Pu Yi, who was installed in Manchukuo will never be accepted as the legitimate leader of the region. In OTL, fighting continued until 1951 between KMT and CCP forces. Under these circumstances, China will certainly be a headache for Japan...

-Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Khwaja Nazimuddin, Ghulam Mohammad, and Iskandar Ali Mirza starting in 1947, will be a major pain for Japanese and German forces in the India region. The problem is that he would be the leader of the Pakistani rebels that are opposed to the Indian government.

-Ho Chi Minh starting in 1945 is certainly going to make things ugly for the Japanese forces in Indochina. You also have Ngô Ðình Diệm and General Võ Nguyên Giáp in 1954. Under these circumstances, you are going to have problems for the Japanese forces at least until 1975.

- In the Middle East, you have Reza Shah Pahlavi (backed by the British and Soviets), Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al-Husseini (backed by the Germans), Avraham Stern, the leader of the Jewish Lehi terrorist gang, and Hashemite Emir Abdullah I of Transjordan (backed by the Germans). The fighting had begun long before 1941. In this ATL, consider this another place where German forces would be tied up....

 

[midnight77]

we are still missing the worst part. total extermination of all jews outside the us and anzac.

 

[Dean_the_Young]

-Mao Tse-tung, Chiang Kai-shek, and Lin Biao have been actively fighting in China against the Japanese since 1936. Under these circumstances, Emperor Pu Yi, who was installed in Manchukuo will never be accepted as the legitimate leader of the region. In OTL, fighting continued until 1951 between KMT and CCP forces. Under these circumstances, China will certainly be a headache for Japan...

Not arguing at all, but "headache" is probably a vast understatement. In Turtledove's Hawaiian invasion books, he gives a statement about how the occupation of China was tying up much of Japan's industry. It was one of those statistics that sounds true, and no one here's ever said that it was BS. The number itself was obscenely high, though I can't remember it exactly. It was between 30% or 60% of Japan's industry, far more than any "headache".

If anyone can hand me the number I'm thinking of, I'd appreciate it.

 

[CalBear]

...
-Ho Chi Minh starting in 1945 is certainly going to make things ugly for the Japanese forces in Indochina. You also have Ngô Ðình Diệm and General Võ Nguyên Giáp in 1954. Under these circumstances, you are going to have problems for the Japanese forces at least until 1975.

....

It seems that the ability of the Viet Minh is being overestimated by at least several miles here. The IJA would not have played by the same rule book that the Americans did (or even the French before them). The Viet Minh ITTL would also lack the massive support from a Superpower that the NVA enjoyed with the USSR.

Given the fact that the Viet Minh had virtually ZERO impact on the occuping IJA, despite the support of the U.S., and to an extent the French, it seems incredibly unlikely that the Viet Minh would have been anything more than a minor irritation to a VICTORIOUS Japanese Empire.

BTW:

Ho started the Viet Minh in 1941 harassing the Japanese. Giap was, by 1944, already in command of a precussor to the NVA, and was engaged in combat with the Japanese. Their lack of effectiveness is noteworthy.

 

[Mr_ Bondoc]

It seems that the ability of the Viet Minh is being overestimated by at least several miles here. The IJA would not have played by the same rule book that the Americans did (or even the French before them). The Viet Minh ITTL would also lack the massive support from a Superpower that the NVA enjoyed with the USSR.

Given the fact that the Viet Minh had virtually ZERO impact on the occuping IJA, despite the support of the U.S., and to an extent the French, it seems incredibly unlikely that the Viet Minh would have been anything more than a minor irritation to a VICTORIOUS Japanese Empire.

BTW:

Ho started the Viet Minh in 1941 harassing the Japanese. Giap was, by 1944, already in command of a precussor to the NVA, and was engaged in combat with the Japanese. Their lack of effectiveness is noteworthy.

Then again, there is the fact that the IJA in this situation is severely limited in resources and manpower, after being occupied by popular resistance in China, the former Soviet Union, the Philippines, Korea, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. This doesn't even touch of even more potential losses due to fighting in the Middle East. Just remember that most Asians distrusted the Japanese as "potential liberators"....

My thought is that the NVA and Viet Cong would serve to be the straw that broke the camel's back...

 

[Locke]

How come European resistance groups are not listed? In Europe, especially in the East, they would become a headache for German troops. they would become evn larger and more effective if the Germans won, due to Soviet soldiers escaping and joining their ranks.

IIRC Yugoslavia or something was liberated by partisans, wasn´t it?

 

[Mr_ Bondoc]

How come European resistance groups are not listed? In Europe, especially in the East, they would become a headache for German troops. they would become evn larger and more effective if the Germans won, due to Soviet soldiers escaping and joining their ranks.

IIRC Yugoslavia or something was liberated by partisans, wasn´t it?

You are correct, that I have forgotten the European Resistance Units. I am basing most of my ideas on those things that I am most familiar with. But here are a few more PODs to give headaches for the Nazis:

-As mentioned before Yugoslavia, would most likely face a major civil war, with the People's Liberation Army (PLA), Yugoslav Royal Army in the Fatherland a.k.a. "Chetniks", and the Croatian military adding to a very deadly situation. In OTL, the fighting continued until 1948...

-Algeria would also be a major site for German troubles. Just remember that you would not only have the Maquis, Francs-tireurs et Partisans (FTP), French Forces of the Interior (FFI), Conseil National de la Résistance (CNR),
Bureau Central de Renseignements et d'Action (BCRA), and Free French Forces (FFL), but OAS (Organisation armée secrète), Algerian People's Manifest (Manifeste du peuple algérien), Algerian Popular Union(Union populaire algérienne), Armée de Libération Nationale (National Liberation Army). In OTL, the fighting lasted until 1958....

-Another area that will keep Germans occupied will be Greece. where you have the National Liberation Front (ELAS) , National Republican Greek League (EDES) , National and Social Liberation (EKKA) . In OTL, fighting went on in the region until 1949. This could be a disaster, with fighting in Yugoslavia feeding of fighting in Greece....

-Finally, another place for some terrible "headaches" would be France. With France, you would have the Maquis, Francs-tireurs et Partisans (FTP), French Forces of the Interior (FFI), Conseil National de la Résistance (CNR),
Bureau Central de Renseignements et d'Action (BCRA), and Free French Forces (FFL). This could create a situation similar to the Spanish Civil War, or the situation in Yugoslavia....

 

[Dan1988]

-Another area that will keep Germans occupied will be Greece. where you have the National Liberation Front (ELAS) , National Republican Greek League (EDES) , National and Social Liberation (EKKA) . In OTL, fighting went on in the region until 1949. This could be a disaster, with fighting in Yugoslavia feeding of fighting in Greece....

Much of that OTL fighting was because of the Greek Civil War, since ELAS was a front for the KKE (the Greek Communist Party) and EDES was stacked with Venizelists and Royalists, one of the few times when Royalists and Venizelists were together. What could really change the course of the Greek Resistance was if the EAM (the National Liberation Front, a non-violent front of the KKE) accepted ELAS, EDES, and EKKA as part of it, and thus include all the political factions into the Mountain Government. Of course this would mean that some huge differences would have to be reconciled, which would be near-ASBish unless a huge attempt was made. If reconciliation does occur, then the Greek Civil War would be butterflied away, unless the government-in-exile in Cairo believes otherwise.