What Would Have Happened If?

[HDPM]

The latest France thread got me thinking again about how the world might be different if we had a different strategy in WWII. I don't know the answer to this and have not thought about it enough. But what if the US had simply let Europe rot in the filth of their own doing and stood by developing the atomic bomb? Maybe we would have had to kick the crap out of Japan anyway. But why did we bother helping the europeans? How would things have been differrent if we let things run their course. And post war, why should we have bothered with NATO? Why did it matter to us if France was a decent place to live? If the US had not suffered the economic costs of the war, how much more advanced might we have been? If we kept our powder dry and had the bomb, what would have happened?

I don't know. But I think Americans might learn something by questioning things we mostly take for granted. Like fighting WWII and helping europe was automatically good and beyond question, which is how the history is viewed for the most part I think. Did we end up helping China and the Soviets too much? Should we have helped colonial powers? How might the cold war have been different? Would the USSR have been too damaged to take over as much as they did? Ideas?

[Sloats]

I am quiet certain that if we were not in the midst of WWII with Germany, we would not have researched the atomic bomb.

If we didn't get involved, we would have become Brazil.

[MMMMMM]

^

[HDPM]

Maybe.

But is was known Germany was working on the bomb. Might we have gone ahead with it anyway? Assume we would have for the sake of discussion. Because I agree that if Germany or the Soviets developed the bomb and we didn't, things would have been very bad indeed.

[nothumb]

This is an interesting thread. For the record, I think it would have been very, very bad had we not intervened in WW2.

One of two things would have happened.

1. Germany and Russia go back to a non-aggression treaty after the invasion of Russia stalls. They divide up Eastern Europe and Germany is free to press on into Spain and Britain. The Nazis develop the atomic bomb and we either end up in a stalemate or nuclear war.

2. Russia keeps up the fight against Germany, the Nazi regime begins to crumble, or Europe pushes back. The Soviets have unprecedented influence in all of Europe and Stalinism becomes a major world force. Without the allies in Europe and the strategic positions this allowed us to take, we would not have won the Cold War. And it ain't close.

While our relationship with Europe is not so hot right now, it was the basis for a long period of economic and military prosperity for us and them. Where we go from here is debatable, but history is on the side of intervention.

NT

[CCass]

Several years ago I read a novel titled "Fatherland" by Robert Harris. Set in the 60's, it is a story about what happens in Europe when the US doesn't get involved in WWII (at least in the European theatre). A very good book with some interesting ideas about what could have happened.

[Zeno]

By mid -1939 all knowledgeable physicists knew of fission, which and recently been conclusively proven by experimentation, and of the possiblity and potential development of an atomic bomb. Most of the best Physicists in the world were already in or flocking to the US. I think the US would have developed the bomb even if she had not entered WW2. Perhaps not as fast as we did under the pressure of war time, but certainly in a reasonable amount of time.

-Zeno

[Ray Zee]

if germany won the war and ruled the world we would have better screws. i hate stripping out those stupid china and asian soft steel screws all the time.

[HDPM]

Yep, could have happened.

I will toss out an alternate scenario. The Soviets chew up the Germans. Basically as they did. They don't get the mop up help from the US and Britain. France, Britain, etc... are basically destroyed. But now what? You have either the Soviets or Germany trying to hold ground and run Europe and the world. Stalin trying to do it with a smaller population since he deliberately starved so many millions. The Nazis trying to kill everybody. Both systems were irrational and not sustainable. The result is that millions would have died of course, as millions did die under those regimes. Now europe has its second Dark Age caused by dumb assness. First it was the Church and dumbass feudalism, next it would have been the product of dumbass philosophies that had different bases for their irrationalism. How long would the dark age last? How much ground could they hold on their own? Wouldn't either winning side have bitten off more than they could handle? Now the USA is sitting across a big ocean and has a lot of stuff. Money, industry, ideas, etc... Would all the former colonies have turned to the commies? Or adopted the dumbass ideas that plunged Europe into the second dark age? What about Asia? Would the US have then been involved in Korea and Vietnam? WOuld China have gone hard core commie, r might it have been different?

Again, I don't know, and perhaps the question is unanswerable. Your 2 scenarios may be correct. But something tells me it might not be so cut and dried.

[Gamblor]

I raise.

We'd all be wearing lederhosen.

[GWB]

Fifty years from now we will be asking, What would have happened if we didn't fight terrorism in those early days of the century?

Would the world be as nice a place as it turned out?

[HDPM]

How do you think the rise of modern terrorism was affected by the post WWII shakeout and cold war? Even the real GWB analyzes more deeply than your post. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[GWB]

[ QUOTE ]
How do you think the rise of modern terrorism was affected by the post WWII shakeout and cold war? Even the real GWB analyzes more deeply than your post. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You assume that I was interested in rehashing history. My post is more relevant to our future. Our future is our main concern, the minor setbacks we suffer occasionally in our current efforts will pale in comparison with what we ultimately achieve.

But since you asked, the cold war distracted a lot of resources and attention from the Middle East and allowed corrupt Islamist sects to develop. Less than ideal governments were tolerated as long as they stayed out of the Soviet orbit. Once the Cold War was over, we should have started work against terror, but unfortunately Bill Clinton was in power and didn't really care.

W

[elwoodblues]

You are probably right. And in those discussions, the question will come up "What would have happened if we hadn't started the Iraq war?" The answer - nothing.

[Zeno]

I think it is very probable that without the United States the Europeans would now be enjoying another dark age as you so poignantly stated. Europeans cannot disentangle themselves from the brutality of their past. We in the US have no such draglines or anchors of moronic history to darken our outlook. That always-contentious lot across the pond has been, and still is, morally bankrupt and, in addition, will always drive itself into epileptic fits of bloodletting and fascism.

Only in America (with a nod to Britain) has Western Man grown up into something that is worthwhile, superior, and civilized.

-Zeno

[superleeds]

Shall we add some facts.

Japan declared war on the US and bombed pearl harbour 2 years after the outbreak of WW2. Germany and Japan formed an alliance. You declared war on Germany.

The US only really had a choice not long after WW1 when it decided to expand it's Pacific sphere of influence (no critizism) and to try and curtail that of its only real adversary in the region - Japan.

Now if Hitler had not existed and instead a communist regime had taken control of Germany we may very well be living in different world today.

[MMMMMM]

"Only in America (with a nod to Britain) has Western Man grown up into something that is worthwhile, superior, and civilized."


Hear that, Andy? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[andyfox]

Loud and clear, sir, loud and clear.

We're the new and improved Europe.

[IrishHand]

I think the answer to your question depends entirely on when you're hypothesizing that the US ceased it's war assistance/efforts in the European/Atlantic theater.

(1) If you're saying "never", as in after WWI, the US threw their hands up and refused to involve themselves in Europe in any way, shape or form, but otherwise events in Europe proceeded as actual, it's reasonable to assume that Germany would have emerged victorious. With no hope of help from the US, Britain would have had no choice but to accept Hitler's pre-Battle-of-Britain olive branch in the summer of '40. Hitler saw value in Britain remaining an imperial empire, since he knew that if Britain were to fall, other nations would benefit far more than Germany in aquiring their colonial empire. Hitler apparently felt that Britain was a natural ally, and some manner of peace treaty likely would have either required or resulted in much closer, more positive relations with the Reich. With nothing taking any resources (Luftwaffe, defending France, N. Africa, etc) away from his primary goal, Hitler invades Russia. Given that the Wehrmacht nearly succeeded in taking St. Petersburg (Leningrad) and Moscow as it was, with the added divisions, aircraft and materiel that Germany could have thrown into the mix - and with Russia lacking even the hope of British and/or American assistance - Germany could have taken those two cities and toppled the Soviet regime. The problem then lies in what the Third Reich would have done had Hitler achieved all the goals stated in Mein Kampf - the unification of his envisioned Third Reich, stretching from Western Germany to the Urals. Hitler was a lot of things, but he was remarkably consistent with the things he expressed in his book. As others have noted above, the Nazi form of government was hardly conducive to a healthy, vibrant nation...but who knows? A peace-time Nazi Germany never really existed.

(2) However, given that it's not really reasonable to suppose the the US never helped Great Britain in any form. Despite widespread opposition among many Americans, the US still furnished Britain with tremendous amounts of assistance, especially after the fall of France in the summer of '40. However, had Hitler not made the brilliant move of declaring war on the US post-Pearl-Harbor, it's reasonable to argue that the widespread US sentiment to focus almost exclusively on the Pacific theater would have won out. The US continues to supply some aid to Britain and Russia, but focuses their military power on the Japanese. 1942 plays out - in Europe - pretty much as it did in reality. Hitler grasps for Stalingrad and gets his hand cut off. From that point (winter 42) forward, Germany is essentially in perpetual retreat. Large doses of tactical defensive brilliance on the part of German generals resulted in reality in Russia needing two full years to get to the doorstep of Berlin. Without North Africa, the invasion of Italy and D-Day, Germany is surely able to mount a more effective defense on the Eastern front. However, several additional divisions aren't enough to prop up the paper empire which is the German forces on the Eastern front for more some additional time. One way or another, Russian dominance in manpower and production overwhelms them. I would assume in this no-direct-US-military-involvement-in-Europe scenario that Russia takes 3 years to do what it did in 2 years in reality, while the US steamrolls the Japanese fleet and occupies all Japanese-held islands and territory in less than that time. We end up with an Asia and Europe dominated by Russia with an America (N and S) and Pacific dominated by the US. Given that the US dominated that in reality, it's hard to rationally argue that Soviet Russia - with the additional resources and manpower of all of Germany, France and Italy - wouldn't have overwhelmed the US sooner or later. As it was, it was nearly a dead heat for several decades.

Basically, I don't think it's reasonable to argue in favor of a scenario wherein the US is a more powerful nation now had they been less involved in the European theater of WWII. Indeed, had they been more involved, and sooner, one can easily envision a scenario where the US is even more dominant than it is now. If D-Day takes place a year earlier and the Allies more aggressively launch their offensive into Germany, Germany collapses much sooner and falls entirely under Allied control. The Soviets would have been lucky to get back all their former territory - to say nothing of the whole of Eatern Europe including the Baltic states which they occupied and controlled in reality. Again given the relatively close competition in the Cold War, one would have to imagine that this increase in Allied power in Europe with a corresponding decrease in Soviet power in that area would have turned the Cold War in favor of the US much quicker than it did.

Just a few thoughts... /images/graemlins/smile.gif
Irish

[MMMMMM]

"We're the new and improved Europe."

Please tell Cyrus, then;-)

[Cyrus]

First of all, here's what a conservative has to say about the relationship between Britain and America. His take is that now Britain has become America's poodle (http://www.amconmag.com/2004_07_05/taki.html) and it's interesting to read his reasoning for this : America in WWII effectively stripped Britain from its colonies and almost bankrupt it when it agreed to "help". The price for saving Britain was demoting it from an imperial, colonial superpower to the status of mere big power - and taking its place in the world.

As to what would have happened in Europe and the world, had America not intervened? Well, then Britain, knowing this, would have to accommodate the Germans in some way and invite them in the club of colonial superpowers - the aim of both World Wars, actually, especially the first one. (Read your Hobsbawm before posting in this thread, please, it saves you time.)

It is all a matter of wild speculation, of course, what with all the numerous and serious variables, but here's my take of Europe circa 1944, with America having won its war against Japan - but staying out of Europe. Britain sues for peace with Germany; Germany accepts; Europe turns rightward and democracies are either abandoned or turn into much more autocratic regimes; Britain accepts to render Palestine to European Jews; the Jews' holocaust is not completed but we do have some sort of replay of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, only this time without Israel enjoying the real world's American support; Eastern Europe is shared between Russia and Germany, with the oilfields of Rumania shared between them; Europe turns united the way Napoleon envisaged it, under a very strong leadership and with a very rapacious attitude, to boot. In one year, Europeans have the A-bomb. (What happened to the Russia-Germany war, you ask? It's unwinnable for Germany, IMO. So, either Hitler is truly offed in a coup or he finally comes to term with Joe Stalin, not a tough thing between two dictatorships.)

NOW, ABOUT YOUR SECOND THOUGHTS ABOUT THE U.S. HELPING THE EUROPEANS: Next time you meet someone you saved his ass under whatever circumstances, don't for a moment think you are entitled to doing whatever you want and him supporting you! This nullifies the whole purpose behind your saving his ass.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Shall we add some facts.

Japan declared war on the US and bombed pearl harbour 2 years after the outbreak of WW2. Germany and Japan formed an alliance. You declared war on Germany.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let's change this a little.

Shall we add some facts.

Germany and Japan formed an alliance. Japan declared war on the US and bombed pearl harbour 2 years after the outbreak of WW2. Germany declared war on the U.S. The U.S. then declared war on Germany.