If it's going to go back to the British in some form, then maybe the US will want to keep the choice bits for itself? British Columbia, Halifax, stuff like that?
USA joins the Central Powers.
- Thread starter Strategos
- Start date
If it's going to go back to the British in some form, then maybe the US will want to keep the choice bits for itself? British Columbia, Halifax, stuff like that?
Western Yukon Territory to add to Alaska, British Columbia (expel a bunch of Canadians to avoid troubles), larger Maine, maybe something in the New York/Ontario area, leases on major port facilities, an economic agreement, and the US could promise to help rebuild Canada.
I could see that. Leases as in 99 years, and actually forever? For New York/Ontario area, everything south of the St. Lawrence? It certainly looks clean on a map.
If I were writing a main-stream AH novel about this kind of scenario, a U-boat ambush of a big RN convoy to Canada wiping out the core of their naval and land reinforcements would be my big-ticket way to deal with the problem. It might not be plausible enough for AH.com standards, but, like in CK2, sometimes things are more fun when they don't run according to plan.
50, 99, depends on the scale of the victory.
As for the annexations, I meant the are between Michigan and New York, aside from the larger population centers.
They have the resources to fight both to some extent. The - ignoring the US as its figures will be far higher TTL - total mobilized men for the Entente vs. the Central Powers is almost three to two in the Entente's favor (36.9 vs. 25.1)
So unless the US mobilizes as many men as Germany (13.25 million) or Russia (13 million), it's not even even numbers.
And at sea, the US fleet is going to take a while to be built up to the point of being a major threat - 975,000 tons is comparable to the French navy. Look at how long it took for Texas to go from start to commission: http://www.bb35library.usstexasbb35.com/history/1910-1914all.htm
Even if you cut that in half (unlikely), that's a fairly prolonged period.
I'm not saying the Entente would win against the CP+US, but "the US means a CP curbstomp" doesn't work quite as well as the US adding to the Entente did to break Germany.
The USA was able to keep the southern states in the Union even though most Southerners hated the Yankees.
Occupation of Canada, which would mainly involve holding a couple of cities, would be even easier.
This is especially true because southerners thought of themselves as a "nation" while Canadians did not see themselves as a nation until after WWI with Vimy Bridge, which we can assume would be butterflied away here.
Not sure about "most". And holding a couple cities isn't exactly enough to hold Canada.
Plus, Canadians do not see themselves as Americans - whether they see themselves as a nation or part of the Empire, their loyalties are rather strongly elsewhere.
Jasen777
Donor
You need some huge pods for this. The U.S. public was very much against getting involved in some stupid European war. It took 3 years for Wilson to drag the country into it. Even with a U.S. that is suddenly for no good reason pro-central powers and willing to go against it's natural allies, the U.S. isn't going to jump in at the beginning of a European conflict...
If you want a random war "what if the U.S. joined the central powers in 1914 for no good reason and with no build up" that's fine, but you should take it to ASB...
If you want a random war "what if the U.S. joined the central powers in 1914 for no good reason and with no build up" that's fine, but you should take it to ASB...
I really just don't think most Canadians would put up a fight if they were forced to become Americans in this time period.
Most of their economic interests were in the USA so the economic elites would support annexation and might even act as traitors. Western Canadians also wouldn't mind because the border in the west was extremely porous so there was a lot of intermingling between Canadians and Americans there.
Most opposition will come from Ontario and Quebec, but the USA could just occupy them Reconstruction-style if need be.
(and Quebecois opposition will be based on getting independence from BOTH the USA and Britain, not to stay part of the Empire)
Last edited:
Why not?
Economic interests in the US do not equal wanting to be conquered by the US.
Which will go over really well.
I doubt they're going to be more fond of being part of the US than the Empire if the US imposes what I think you mean by "Reconstruction style" occupaton.
-lack of Canadian nationalism
-economic interests in the USA
-Empire proving worthless at protection
-Americans are very similar culturally, why bother fighting?
-more freedom in 1914 USA compared to the Empire
Sometimes it does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Annexation_Manifesto
Which will go over really well.
Only if they put up a fight. And like Reconstruction, it would be temporary until they are eventually made states and annexation gradually becomes accepted.
Agreed, which is why I say Quebec would argue for independence. It would not fight for Britain. The conscription crisis showed how much Quebec cared about the Empire. The USA might allow it to be independent for linguistic purposes, or it might not. Depends on the president.
As a dual Canadian/American citizen and an active member of one of the above nation's armed forces I am actually quite insulted by this post.
So we're more then willing to support a war on another continent in support of Britain, but we'd be opposed to fighting American invaders who just invaded us? Or oppose an occupation afterwards? I dare you to say that in any Canadian bar... or to my great grand father who served in the First World War in the Canadian Corps, long before the US showed up.
It shows how little you know. Yes we were economically tied to you, but we did a lot of business with Britain still, your trying to tie common day cold war mentality to a vastly diffierent situation. If the Americans randomly invaded our Dominion in anyway either randomly it doesn't matter how much 'intermingling' we did. If we were best friends and you came over and claimed to own my house, you think I'm just going to say "cool no problem." Not a chance. Western Canadians may even oppose it even more because its a lot harder to invade western Canada... its like invading Russia, a hell of a lot of land and not enough troops to cover it... Even if you took the key cities like Winnpieg, Edmonton and Calgary there's a lot of miles between cities where bushwackers and others who aren't pleased with it to add a lot of guns...
Yeah because eastern Canada and western Canada are just going to lay down and shut up and say "Make us American Yanks!" You'd have a lot of opposition in the Martimes and Newfoundland where the British Navy kept a lot of troops stationed. Halifax specifically was a British naval port.. you think that we're going to be welcoming American Marines into halifax harbor?
Even if they did.. Ontario and Quebec accounted for the BULK of the Canadian industry and population.. you'd have to flatten Toronto, London, Ottawa, Quebec City and Montreal to get them to surrender.. anyone whose studied WWI for five minutes knows even the Americans acknowledged the Canadians as some of the best fighters of the war.. it isn't exactly going to be a steamroll, espcielly considering we're on defense. Add in a likely bloody occupation from Canadians that honestly don't want the Yanks there and you've got a nice "Re-Construction" on your hands.
And you think the Quebecois are going to like being "Americanized" even more then English speaking Canadians. At least English speaking Canadians share the same language... French speaking canadians aren't going to want anything to do with American "Re-Construction"
Again... highly insulted by your seeming lack of knowledge.
I dare you to say that to any Canadian veteran... hell any Canadian... thats liable to get you punched in the face with a Moosehead bottle. Vimy Ridge wasn't the sole driver behind Canadian nationalism, and if you think ONE battle is made a nation it shows how little about Canada you really know... as an example it's a date called July 1st 1867 the CANADIAN CONFEDERATION... today we called the anniversary of that day Canada Day
Economic interests do not mean we want to be annexed. Last I checked Canada is one of the US BIGGEST trading partners today but we aren't exactly lining up to be the next 13 states in the Union are we?
How are they proving worthless at protecting? From the troops they are obviously going to send if invaded by the US like in the War of 1812? From the Royal Navy Squadrons that were in Halifax and British Columbia?
The British were fighting Napoleon during the War of 1812 and they STILL deployed troops to Canada.
I don't know... because your invading our nation? We still like Britain more?
Haha don't make me laugh... you think our so called renewed freedoms are on our minds while the US Army is invading? Don't think so...
EDIT:
Hmm... so apparently a document that is at this point 60 years old and a movement that died five years after that is base of fact we'd like to happen again? Sure.... no. I think something like this may be the reason why we'd be opposed to be annexed though I could be wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Confederation
They would fight though... that's the point and they'd keep on fighting until you got out of the nation. Unlike the Confederacy where they were formally members of the United States, and thus actually had people in the CSA's states that were readdmitted that remember what it was like to be in the Union, the Canadians were NEVER apart of the United States..
Last edited:
Vesica, would you say Canada in the nineteen-teens was drawn towards the British Empire loyalty and passion wise, or was it already "we're Canada and that's what we're proud of."?
What I know of Canada nationhood and a sense of it is almost entirely tied in with the reading I've done on the Canadian Pacific - and that was an entirely different era and set of attitudes on so many things it's probably useless (except in that even at that point the sense of "Canada" and not just distinct provinces is there).
What I know of Canada nationhood and a sense of it is almost entirely tied in with the reading I've done on the Canadian Pacific - and that was an entirely different era and set of attitudes on so many things it's probably useless (except in that even at that point the sense of "Canada" and not just distinct provinces is there).
You are speaking as a 2012 Canadian, not a 1914 Canadian.
Stop being so offended. I am just stating my opinion.
Britain would not be able to protect Canada in this hypothetical WWI, which means Canada would have to fend for itself. Thus, if we are to see how the USA would handle Canada, I would look to the Civil War to see how the USA handles a hostile white population that covers a large area that could not keep US troops off it.
Canada would not be able to survive, despite the patriotism of some Canadians, similar to how Southern patriotism could not save the CSA.
(in some ATL, a dual US-Confederate citizen is bitching at me that southerners would ever accept staying citizens of the USA.)
Stop being so offended. I am just stating my opinion.
Britain would not be able to protect Canada in this hypothetical WWI, which means Canada would have to fend for itself. Thus, if we are to see how the USA would handle Canada, I would look to the Civil War to see how the USA handles a hostile white population that covers a large area that could not keep US troops off it.
Canada would not be able to survive, despite the patriotism of some Canadians, similar to how Southern patriotism could not save the CSA.
(in some ATL, a dual US-Confederate citizen is bitching at me that southerners would ever accept staying citizens of the USA.
)
Last edited:
Super Cool:
The British Empire is quite capable of protecting Canada, and the ACW is not remotely compatible to the situation at hand.
For one thing, there are more than a few Southern Unionists (not even counting the slaves with no devotion to the CSA).
And speaking as an American, making statements like you did on Canadian feelings goes beyond the protection granted to personal opinions.
The British Empire is quite capable of protecting Canada, and the ACW is not remotely compatible to the situation at hand.
For one thing, there are more than a few Southern Unionists (not even counting the slaves with no devotion to the CSA).
And speaking as an American, making statements like you did on Canadian feelings goes beyond the protection granted to personal opinions.