Max Sinister
Banned
I think that if the powers made a status quo before war peace, revolutions might happen in all of them, after all the sacrifices were futile.
Inconclusive WW1
- Thread starter Rockingham
- Start date
OK, so the crux seems to be that the US stays out of the war or goes to war with Japan.
-War with Mexico after Zimmermann telegram might also distract US Army
-Germany *never* resumes U-boat operations against the US
-French mutiny in 1917 is noticed by Germans and exploited, resulting in an effective offensive that probably doesn't take Paris but could put it in shelling range
-Germans set up puppet government in Russia and set up trade with US/Japan via Vladivostok/TS Railway by early 1918
-Ukrainians become effective ally for Germany and supply food/troops
-War with Mexico after Zimmermann telegram might also distract US Army
-Germany *never* resumes U-boat operations against the US
-French mutiny in 1917 is noticed by Germans and exploited, resulting in an effective offensive that probably doesn't take Paris but could put it in shelling range
-Germans set up puppet government in Russia and set up trade with US/Japan via Vladivostok/TS Railway by early 1918
-Ukrainians become effective ally for Germany and supply food/troops
I'm confused. What China-Japan war? China wasn't fighting the Japanese in WW1. The Japanese attacked and took the German enclave at Tsingtao..that is all.
The 20 demands date from 1894 well before WW1. Also, well before the US-Spanish War, the Boxer Rebellion (in which the US, European Powers and Japan were allied) and the Russo-Japanese War. I really doubt the US would care much at this stage.
As for the Japanese attacking US trade..well..how much was there within reach of the Japanese Navy and outside that of the RN / USN (post 1898) ? Most would go through Shanghai, Canton, Hong Kong and Macao, all far away from Japanese forces in the early 1900's. Attacking trade would piss the UK off far more than the US and, at this stage( early 1900's), the UK was building much of the Japanese navy.
Also, as I may have mentioned, in OTL the USA did not declare war upon Japan even after US ships were bombed. Pretty mcuh the same way they didn't declare war against Israel over the USS Liberty or N Korea over the Pueblo incident.
I have no problem with the concept of a stalemate peace in the 1914-18 war, I just feel that by 1918 things had progressed too far, whereas prior to that both side thougt they could win. My guess is 1917 would be most likely and even that involves some leaps of imagination.
The 20 demands date from 1894 well before WW1. Also, well before the US-Spanish War, the Boxer Rebellion (in which the US, European Powers and Japan were allied) and the Russo-Japanese War. I really doubt the US would care much at this stage.
As for the Japanese attacking US trade..well..how much was there within reach of the Japanese Navy and outside that of the RN / USN (post 1898) ? Most would go through Shanghai, Canton, Hong Kong and Macao, all far away from Japanese forces in the early 1900's. Attacking trade would piss the UK off far more than the US and, at this stage( early 1900's), the UK was building much of the Japanese navy.
Also, as I may have mentioned, in OTL the USA did not declare war upon Japan even after US ships were bombed. Pretty mcuh the same way they didn't declare war against Israel over the USS Liberty or N Korea over the Pueblo incident.
I have no problem with the concept of a stalemate peace in the 1914-18 war, I just feel that by 1918 things had progressed too far, whereas prior to that both side thougt they could win. My guess is 1917 would be most likely and even that involves some leaps of imagination.
Bill Cameron
Banned
Does anyone actually read what ive written? I explained it
EoR,
You can explain it all you want. It still doesn't make any sense.
- The Twenty Demands date from the 1890s and no Western power cared about them until the 1930s.
- Japan was not fighting China during the period in question (1914-18).
- Japan has a treaty with one of the Entente powers, a treaty that both sides are honoring.
- Japan was fighting the Central Powers during the period in question, not only in the Pacific but also with naval forces in Europe.
- OTL US trade during the period with China was miniscule compared to that crossing the Atlantic.
- Your suggested US arms shipments to a China somehow fighting Japan would be a casus belli for Japan and not the US.
First, submarines cannot 'bomb' ships.
Second, the reason the US declared war on Germany in 1917 was the Zimmerman Telegram. Google it or go to a library and read up on it. Germany had been sinking ships and killing Americans for years by 1917 and Wilson had been able to sod all about it aside from making diplomatic noises. The US wasn't just divided on the issue of entering the war, despite the sinkings, the US didn't want anything to do with the war.
Only the Eastern US was interested in entering the war, the South, Midwest, and West wanted nothing to do with it until they read about a German proposal to ally with Mexico - a nation currently suffering from a civil war and several of whose factions were raiding into US territory - with the announced purpose of Mexico recieving the lands she lost in 1849 from a defeated US. Once the Telegram was released to the press on March 1st, public opinion across the US rapidly shifted and war was declared on April 6th. You'll notice that two years of ship sinkings and American deaths had failed to accomplish what the Telegram did in five weeks.
That's what drove the US into the war against the Central Powers and not ship sinkings.
If you need to keep the US out of WW1, stop the Zimmerman Telegram and/or bog the US down in a massive intervention in Mexico. Roping in an Entente-allied Japan fighting an ATL war in China and encurring enough US anger to spark a Pacific war is too great a leap without PODs 'deeper' in time that would probably change the start of WW1 and it's early conduct out of recognition.
Bill
Rockingham
Banned
Alright japan takes advantage of world war to give 20 demands again. This would anger us because it would take away alot of their trade. This, along with us ships being bombed(numerous times) results in war. The us public by now felt it even had a moral obligation to protect china, much like israel today.
Israel was allied and had nukes. North korea had nukes
They went to war with north vietnam when they attacked us ship, and they would go to war with iran if they bombed US ships. the main motivation for war on germany was the same as above.
Japan, during war, would invade hainan, and already had taiwan, so it could attack those ports. \
Any other problems
Alright japan takes advantage of world war to give 20 demands again. This would anger us because it would take away alot of their trade. This, along with us ships being bombed(numerous times) results in war. The us public by now felt it even had a moral obligation to protect china, much like israel today.
<snip>
Any other problems
In 1920 the United States exports to China were valued at $119,000,000. The exports to Japan, though on the decline after the war years were still triple that.
Also, the USA didn't support China as policy in 1920. China was being torn apart by a lack of strong leadership being ruled by a succession of Warlords that eventually led to civil war in 1927. The ruling government paid lip service to the West but little more than that. The US Merchant Marines and merchant traders were already accustomed to losing shipping in China due to Piracy, both state sponsored and not.
As well, the US and Japan had fairly strong diplomatic ties at this time in history. Given a lack of US involvement in WW1 that means that the US would have continued to build these ties and may have even supported Japan in her Imperialistic Chinese aims if she could guarantee American shipping there.
Also, as a previous poster stated - the majority of Far East Chinese trade went through European held ports.
Have look at this website to see exactly how extensive the European holdings and agreements were in China. In 1915-1925 Japan risked the Ire of virtually every great power by attacking China. And during this period they NEEDED European support to continue to equip for their coming empire.
http://www.geocities.com/treatyport01/TREATY01.html
So, given the conditions you've set forth:
1) Stalemated WWI
2) Japanese Imperial ambitions in China realized
3) Attacks on American Shipping in the far east by Japan
I don't see the USA going to war with Japan over China nor do I see a Pearl Harbour style attack on the USA during this period.
Who knows though...anything is possible I suppose. History turns on the single flap of a butterfly's wings.
Rockingham
Banned
-Western powers had ports in china, and 20 demands effectively attempt to create chinese protectorate. America without a doubt would oppose that, as would britain. It rejects their demands, and angers britain as well(enough to end alliance?)
-No reason for it to not take advantage of the world war.
-You assume an honourable side to Japan's politics. I am assuming a realpolitik view
-The death of americans wouldn't be enough?(alrigh, i suppose thats a double standard to my point above)
-Ok, my mistake, incorrect terminology
-It would be enough to declare china a warzone and attack trading ships.
-Zimmerman telegram was the tip on top of the iceburg, but it was decisive.
Your correct though, the idea is flawed. My mistake
You've made no mistake EoR - Alternate History is the discusion of the fantastical - stuff that never happened but could have.
I say you write the time line. Make enough changes to the OTL to make your stalemated WWI/War USA v Japan in 1920 possible.
You could negate (somewhat) the continued need for Britain's favour in 1920 say by - Having Japan capture intact the entire Russian fleet in a revised 1905 Russo-Japan war or something that would give Japan a large enough fleet by 1920 to just not care about European or American interference.
And perhaps put into power a Japanese War minister in 1915 who thinks that Alaska should be Japanese territory. Given in your timeline that the USA stays out of WW1 why would the British feel any inclination at all to interfere in a war with two powers that weren't involved in any great way in the WW1.
Both of these aren't particularly plausible - but would be a great history.
Good luck EoR.
Bill Cameron
Banned
EoR,
They hadn't cared about the Twenty Demands for over 25 years, why should it suddenly matter now? And why should the Western Powers heap more on their plate during the middle of a world war? And would the Western Powers act to anger an active ally?
Japan was already taking advantage of a world war. Look up just how much German territory they grabbed. It was when Japan didnt get as much from the Versailles Treaty that they became more hositle towards European powers.
I'm assuming rational Japanese policies, policies that were already realpolitik. (Irrational Japanese policies would have to wait for the 1920s after Japan is snubbed at Versailles.) Why would Japan initiate a war when she's already getting everything she wants without one? Why would the Western Powers suddenly show concern over Japan's actions in China when they hadn't shown concern over the same actions by Japan for 25 years?
You want all this to occur so show us why it should occur, just don't say it does. There has to be an underlying reason.
Those deaths weren't enough in the OTL so why would they be enough in your ATL? Again, what's the difference? If there is one then explain it to us and just don't say it's so.
Once again, Japan needn't kick off a war in China because she's already getting everything she wants without a war.
Of course it was decisive. In five weeks it caused a declaration of war when three years of American deaths had already failed to do so.
I'm having difficulty understanding your ideas behind this thread. You started off with an inconclusive WW1, you gave the thread that title, and we've supplied several ideas that could create an inconclusive WW1. However, it seems what you were really looking for was a Japanese-American war because you've done nothing but post about that despite our repeated explanations that your ideas behind it are implausible.
Make up your mind. We can help you with either one. We can even help you with both together. A Japanese-American war distracting the US would keep the US out of WW1, but such a war would require PODs 'deeper' in time than you're apparently willing to consider and such PODs would also effect the start and conduct of WW1 extensively.
Bill
Rockingham
Banned
Agreed on most points. However "japan was already getting everything she wants"? what do yo mean. They were only occupying their gains in versailles treaty plus a few other minor islands. They werent really snubbed by versailles either. I think they only got a little less then they expecteed. They couldnt of thought they would get new guinea, solomons and samoa; they might of assumed they get nauru but thats hardly a great loss. Those colonies actually were a drain on resources anyway, the only worthwile one was the treat port. I don't think they felt "snubbed" by versailles, hostility came when russia occupied port arthur when japan withdrew. that was the turning point.
I agree, I've paid to much attention to this failed idea, i'll try another one to keep us out of war. As you said, zimmerman telgram was decisive, so i might alter that.
I agree, I've paid to much attention to this failed idea, i'll try another one to keep us out of war. As you said, zimmerman telgram was decisive, so i might alter that.
Then the entente is screwed.
All that war material that was needed in Europe is suddenly used by the USA.
And if Britain does honour it's treaty with Japan mad as it would be What does Canada do.
Do they declare neutrality in the war with the US get invaded or simply withdraw from all of the conflicts and wait to see who wins.
One problem here is that any war between the US and GB regardless of whether or not the US joins the central powers the Blockade of Germany effectively ends as the GF would have to be used to protect British merchant shipping from the US in both the Atlantic and Pacific.
Any down grading of the GF will enable the HSF to sortie and engage with much better odds and it might even allow Russia to be cut off and that wuld kill russia.
In any case of the US either being really neutral or at war with GB would in short order win the war for the CP as it was the growing industrial might of the US that kept them going.
Last edited:
Rockingham
Banned
Alright this is perhaps the most important question for my new idea(no zimmerman telegram). Note that im not going to to give a reason because the telegram is clouded in contoversy:Its not evencertain whether or not the Brits fabricated it. So either
-Germany decides not to send it
-Germany is not caught
-Britain decides not to fabricate it
-Brtain is found out, causing hostile relations with US
depending on who you believe. Any way, question is would the usa remain neutral(or at least militarily neutral, I'll alow it to give economicaid) if their is no zimmerman telegram even if Germany keeps sinking US ships? I know their is going to be difference of opinion on this, but itcan't be helped
-Germany decides not to send it
-Germany is not caught
-Britain decides not to fabricate it
-Brtain is found out, causing hostile relations with US
depending on who you believe. Any way, question is would the usa remain neutral(or at least militarily neutral, I'll alow it to give economicaid) if their is no zimmerman telegram even if Germany keeps sinking US ships? I know their is going to be difference of opinion on this, but itcan't be helped
Alright this is perhaps the most important question for my new idea(no zimmerman telegram). Note that im not going to to give a reason because the telegram is clouded in contoversy:Its not evencertain whether or not the Brits fabricated it. So either
-Germany decides not to send it
-Germany is not caught
-Britain decides not to fabricate it
-Brtain is found out, causing hostile relations with US
depending on who you believe. Any way, question is would the usa remain neutral(or at least militarily neutral, I'll alow it to give economicaid) if their is no zimmerman telegram even if Germany keeps sinking US ships? I know their is going to be difference of opinion on this, but itcan't be helped
The only problem is that Wilson was very pro Entente.
The loans were technically a breach of the hague convention, the sell of submarines was differnently a breach of the Hague.
Wilson will use any exchuse to get GB into the European war.
It was just unfortunate for the entente that the war broke out halfway through his first term and wilson couldn't afford politically to enter the war sooner then he did.
What he did do was to essentially provoke the Germany through his policies with the knowledge that not even the biggest war hawk in Germany would dream of Declaeing war on the US.
The only member of his administration who was neutral was sec state Bryan and he was replaced when he would go along with the loans.
David S Poepoe
Banned
Good advice for getting a large fleet of death traps by 1920. These ships weren't even frontline units by 1914. Heck, give them to the Japanese and you may be giving the Americans an easier victory.
And Japan couldn't have refitted them? Easier and less costly than building the equivalent from scratch.
David S Poepoe
Banned
Check your books. The Japanese did refit those warships they captured from the Russians, but against dreadnoughts they are worthless.
I don't have any books on the Russo-Japanese War. Don't claim to be an expert on the conflict.
So if they had captured all of the battleships from Russia - from what I think you're stating - is that even with a refit they would have been useless.
Ok. I accept that.
Bill Cameron
Banned
EoR,
Clouded in controversy? Sweet suffering...
After it had been released to the American press, Arthur Zimmerman, the Imperial German Foreign Minister, freely admitted that he sent it! Unless you somehow believe Zimmerman was an Entente agent, there's no controversy here at all.
Good luck with the rest of your timeline.
Bill