Reich-5: Battle of Britain question

[johndallman]

There's more on the history of Reich-5 in Alternate Earths for 3e, but it concentrates on how that USA turned fascist, rather than how Britain was conquered.

Another detail that could contribute to that: Charles Lindbergh was elected US president in 1936, and regarded fascism as "the wave of the future." If he had blocked the export of 100 octane avgas to the UK, the Spitfire and Hurricane squadrons would not have been able to convert to it in spring 1940 (it all came from the USA at that point) which would have put them at a disadvantage in the BoB compared to OTL.

[ericthered]

Originally Posted by johndallman

There's more on the history of Reich-5 in Alternate Earths for 3e, but it concentrates on how that USA turned fascist, rather than how Britain was conquered.

Another detail that could contribute to that: Charles Lindbergh was elected US president in 1936, and regarded fascism as "the wave of the future." If he had blocked the export of 100 octane avgas to the UK, the Spitfire and Hurricane squadrons would not have been able to convert to it in spring 1940 (it all came from the USA at that point) which would have put them at a disadvantage in the BoB compared to OTL.

If you've got a "Neutral" US that's meddling as hard for the axis as it did for the Allies in OTL, Britain's situation looks a lot bleaker. Japan either gets a free hand in the pacific and indian oceans or the british have to take nasty naval losses on a two front war. blockading India and Australia becomes feasible.


US pressure to make peace would also hurt britain's will to fight. The anglo-sphere is reasonably talented at influencing other members.


That still doesn't give an invasion of Canada in 1945 though.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by mlangsdorf

Events in 1942 can't influence a surrender in 1940 =)

If you mean the attack in Mers-el-Kebir that was in 1940? (I may be misreading you here though!)

Maybe not one of our finer moments, but quite possibly one of our smarter ones!

Originally Posted by cptbutton

My idea for this, is to add the obligatory zeppelins. The Japanese Navy develops very high altitude long range reconnaissance zeppelins in great secrecy, given them an enormous advantage until the US can invent their own VHALRZs and effective weapons for attacking them.

Ah well I'm always happy to involve Zeppelins, I guess my question would be given how Zeppelins are affected by winds how high altitude are we thinking and how fast could they go? It's big area to cover, and you'll always have the potential issue of cloud cover I guess. (the pearl harbour attack group came in under storm cover for a chunk of the way IIRC?).

Originally Posted by cptbutton

Maybe the Germans somehow manage to get some or all of the British Navy to support them by then?

And the US Navy is destroyed or off in the Pacific.

If Britain goes over it would certainly help I guess. If it's more a Britain stalemated or a government in exile I'd guess the RN would be not be available for this though!

Originally Posted by johndallman

There's more on the history of Reich-5 in Alternate Earths for 3e, but it concentrates on how that USA turned fascist, rather than how Britain was conquered.

Another detail that could contribute to that: Charles Lindbergh was elected US president in 1936, and regarded fascism as "the wave of the future." If he had blocked the export of 100 octane avgas to the UK, the Spitfire and Hurricane squadrons would not have been able to convert to it in spring 1940 (it all came from the USA at that point) which would have put them at a disadvantage in the BoB compared to OTL.

Given Eugene Houdry's personal background and ongoing interests at the time I suspect that if the US didn't supply avgas to Britain or was looking sympathetic towards Germany, Britain or possibly Canada might quickly find themselves recipients of the Houdry process and do it themselves!

[tanksoldier]

If Lindbergh had been elected President more than just the export of avgas goes south for the UK.

[mlangsdorf]

Originally Posted by cptbutton

My idea for this, is to add the obligatory zeppelins. The Japanese Navy develops very high altitude long range reconnaissance zeppelins in great secrecy, given them an enormous advantage until the US can invent their own VHALRZs and effective weapons for attacking them.

Alternately and somewhat less implausibly, Japanese Army HQ could have taken a stronger line against Kwantung Army HQ in the late 1920s, preventing or delaying the Mukden incident in 1931, the invasion of Manchuria, and the eventual invasion of China after 1937. Without the invasion of China, the US has much less interest in inflicting an economic embargo on Japan, and Japan has less interest in taking out the US naval base in the Philippines when they go to sweep up the European colonies in SE Asia.

If America isn't arguing with Japan over the invasion of China, it's even possible that the US might let go of the Philippines even earlier than we did historically, further reducing tensions between Japan and the US.

A pro-fascist Lingbergh presidency might not be a friend of England, China, and the Navy in the same way that Roosevelt was historically. It's likely he would not approve of the Two Oceans Navy Act - which was the legislation that put Japan on a time table to defeat the US before all those battleships and carriers were built - and might even give Japanese adventurism in China a free hand as long as they claimed to be focused on fighting the Communists. A smaller US Navy, abandonment of the Philippines, and a general pro-Japan attitude might entirely defuse Japan's tensions with the USA.

Invading Canada from Germany in 1945 is hard. Would a sufficiently pro-Germany Lindbergh government allow Germany to stage an attack from New England? That seems really implausible to me: Lindbergh was an isolationist, but a big believer in Fortress America. But a new president elected in 1944, after seeing Germany defeat England and Russia, might decide to get in on the winning side and at least escort the German troop transports across the Atlantic with USN ships.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by tanksoldier

If Lindbergh had been elected President more than just the export of avgas goes south for the UK.

I guess, thing is just how far is Lindberg going to get the entire country to follow him in being pro Fascist in terms of policy toward the UK & Germany?

No lend lease or favorable loans to the UK yeah I can definitely see that as a minimum

Refusing to sell to or a trade embargo on Britain at all?

Lend lease or favorable loans to Germany*?

Helping Interdict commercial shipping heading to Britain?

Actually getting directly involved militarily (and how does it view Japan, Germany's ally** encroaching on US interests in the Pacific)


Guess it partly depends on just how much he wins by!




*for a Lindberg looking for a Casus Belli with the UK, that might work. US conveys of aide to Germany may well get interdicted by the RN if the UK is still actively fighting!

**although I'm willing to bet given a choice between having the US as an active ally and Japan as an ally, Germany drops Japan like a hot rock!

[Phil Masters]

I seem to recall Ken admitting that he doesn't believe in Reich-5; it may actually be a hallucinatory fantasy passing through Hitler's dying brain in the bunker in 1945. It's there because at some point a Stupid Jetpack Hitler Nazi-victory timeline was considered mandatory. The other Reich timelines in Infinite Worlds probably make a lot more sense.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by tanksoldier

Had this been delayed until actual hostilities it would have reduced the ability of the US to defend itself by a fair margin for a few years, and had Britain capitualated but the Commonwealth nations fought on would have severely limited the ability of the US to assist them while defending itself on two coasts.

Interesting fact about the National Guard, I didn't know that.

But, it seems that Federalizing state troops is something which just takes a few weeks or months. Training and equipping them takes years, and there were some observant and far-sighted US political leaders and military commanders in the late 1930s who planned for the sort of war the US would have to fight in Europe.

Get rid of some of those folks, replace some of them with idiots, and things could be very different.

Originally Posted by tanksoldier

This, combined with Britain's fall would have severely limited or eliminated the ability of the US to send aid to Russia as well, relieving Germany of an enormous burden on that front.

In the 1930s there was a huge, very noisy, and politically powerful isolationist movement, led by folks like Charles Lindbergh and Father Coughlin. They wanted to avoid US involvement in another bloodbath like WWI, admired the Nazis and wanted them to win, or both. Roosevelt and those who had a better understanding of the geopolitical situation had to tread very carefully to avoid political pushback.

Arguably, a certain amount of what Roosevelt did was illegal, given that there were laws on the books which prevented shipment of US arms to warring nations. "Bases for Destroyers," "Lend-Lease" and allowing US pilots to serve as mercenaries in China's American Volunteer Group were all considered to be outrages by the Isolationists.

Any screw-up by Roosevelt or his supporters, or just getting Roosevelt out of the way in any time before 1940, could have made history very different. The Isolationists triumph and the Nazis take over the world.

Originally Posted by tanksoldier

If Mexico had become actively hostile the stituation might have become almost untenable and possibly no aid would have been available.

It's hard to think of a situation where a hostile Mexico would have made that much difference. At the time, the GDP of the US and Mexico were massively unequal (still are, but it was worse 80 years ago) and Mexico was and is heavily dependent on US trade.

One possibility is that in 1938, Mexico nationalized all its oil fields. That could have set the stage for US intervention in Mexico on behalf of US oil companies, which could have led to a bloody Iraq-style guerrilla war against the invaders. If most of America's military was bogged down chasing Mexican guerillas, that would make it impossible for them to re-equip, re-arm, and make strategic preparations for a war against an organized European army.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I think you going to have to go back to an early point of departure.

The only way that you can have War starts in 1939 and the Axis rules the Earth by 1945 is if you figure in "soft" political factors rather than just military forces, comparative GDP, etc.

Two factors which don't get as much play in alternate history are that the Depression of 1929 could have been much worse, which would have meant that more people would be desperate for radical change in the form of communism or fascism. Civil war is a great way to both neutralize a country's military and to make its leaders desperate enough for aid that they welcome foreign military intervention.

Additionally, until 1939 (even after), a lot of very influential people in the US, UK, and France supported Hitler. The Axis could have easily won a purely political victory if pro-Fascist elements in Western Europe were stronger, smarter, and better led, or if anti-fascist or pro-communist forces had been "different."

There's also the simple trick of changing history so that Roosevelt, Churchill, or any of the other political heroes of World War II ended up "playing for the other side." Imagine what would have happened if Churchill had admired Hitler? (After all, in many ways Churchill was an authoritarian bigot.) Or, imagine what would have happened if Roosevelt (a rich aristocrat who would have been right at home among the leaders of the Fascist party) had become enamored by Italian-style Fascism in the 1920s!

[mlangsdorf]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I guess, thing is just how far is Lindberg going to get the entire country to follow him in being pro Fascist in terms of policy toward the UK & Germany?

No lend lease or favorable loans to the UK yeah I can definitely see that as a minimum

Refusing to sell to or a trade embargo on Britain at all?

Lend lease or favorable loans to Germany*?

Helping Interdict commercial shipping heading to Britain?

Actually getting directly involved militarily (and how does it view Japan, Germany's ally** encroaching on US interests in the Pacific)

Guess it partly depends on just how much he wins by!

From what I've read of Lindbergh, he wouldn't push for lend-lease or any of the favorable loans, so that already hurts Britain pretty badly. He certainly wouldn't sell the early production of Sherman tanks to Britain, either - he was definitely a big Fortress America guy and would have wanted them for himself.

I don't think he would have directly embargoed Britain, but he might decide that to respect Germany's blockade of Britain. The US goes back and forth on how much they want freedom of navigation versus respecting other people's blockades, but we generally respected the British blockade of Germany in WWI, so there's precedent for respecting a German blockade of Britain.

I don't see Lindbergh liking Germany so much as to give them favorable loans or interdicting commercial traffic. There is an outside chance that if the US continues shipping to Britain, US traffic would be mandated to be radio noisy, constantly alerting German submarines to their locations as a safety measure - and if they're loudly hailing every other ship they come across, they could serve as beacons for wolf packs. Seems like a dick move, but the USN intervened before our formal entry into the war against Germany in similar ways so it's possible.

The US, at least under Lindbergh, wouldn't get involved militarily in Europe. They might decide to clean European influence out of the Western hemisphere, though, and forcibly decolonize British possessions in central and south America. Even that seems like a stress.

Still, from the British perspective, no Lend-Lease, no DFBA, no USN support against the u-boats, and a soft embargo are pretty bad. Enough to get Halifax to take charge and throw in the towel early? Possibly.