09-05-2002 04:21									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Doesn't matter. Both had a vested interest in containing German power, and would have jumped at the chance to do so if Germany attacked America.

Britain did not want to go war at all with Germany in 1904. It almost didn't go to war with Germany in 1914... only invading neutral Belgium pushed them off the cliff. Though they really may have if the US was attacked.

	09-05-2002 04:35									#62
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I think everyone has over looked one tiny little thing about this plan. The US President was Teddy Roosevelt. If Germany had tried anything like that Teddy would not have let this country let up till the doughboys were marching in Berlin. It wouldn't matter how many early victories the Germans may have enjoyed, Teddy would not have let them stand and would not have negotiated any peace except at the victory table where he would have dictated the terms. Whatever the size of our starting army the Germans would have run into the same problem they ran into later as did the japanese. We have a very good ability to crank up the industrial power of this country for war and an unprovoked attack on our Eastern cities would have made the anger we felt after Pearl Harbour look like a bad hair day.

	09-05-2002 05:12									#63
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Well, that would have been a very interesting war indeed. I would imagine that it probably would have ended in about 1914 if the United States was not going to let up until it had occupied Germany. Even in 1918 the Allied armies didn't occupy Berlin. The very idea of a marine invasion WITHOUT Britain or France to be the launch point (thus being forced to have bring the transports and the landing craft straight from America) would be logistically impossible. In all likelyhood, Teddy would have been ousted from the Presidency by 1912 if he actually wanted to pull off something like that.

	09-05-2002 06:01									#64
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Dom Pedro II Well, that would have been a very interesting war indeed. I would imagine that it probably would have ended in about 1914 if the United States was not going to let up until it had occupied Germany. Even in 1918 the Allied armies didn't occupy Berlin. The very idea of a marine invasion WITHOUT Britain or France to be the launch point (thus being forced to have bring the transports and the landing craft straight from America) would be logistically impossible. In all likelyhood, Teddy would have been ousted from the Presidency by 1912 if he actually wanted to pull off something like that.

I don't know why most people in the world think the people of the United State will not fight. Every time a war come's our way we do fight and the only time we may loose is when the politician get in the way.

	09-05-2002 06:06									#65
	Get a bigger avatar today!

I'm not saying the American people wouldn't fight, and I don't recall hearing ANYBODY ever suggest they wouldn't. Straw man! Straw man!

Anyway, I'm just saying its a matter of common sense. I know we pulled off Normandy, but we didn't just pack up everything in New York and whizz on over there and drop onto the beach. No, of course not! We had to move the men to England first and then cross over... it's a much shorter distance of water you realize . I think if we trounced the Germans quite thuroughly at home and in a naval war, the American people would be like "Ok, good nuff. We won!"... I mean, this concept of "total war" is just NOT that common throughout history.

	09-05-2002 06:38									#66
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I don't know how either country could have actually invaded the other without major buildup of armed forces and supplies near the territory of the other. If the Germans tried building a large army in Mexico, we certain would have responded with our own buildup.

If the war started by the Germans taking some pot shots at New York without a prior buildup, the war would most likely have taken one of three courses. The first would be a naval engagement and a negotiated peace. I believe this what the Germans wanted. The second might be a fight in a far removed location like the Philippines where both sides would have major logistical problems. The third might be a fight to the finish.

A fight to the finish would have been proceeded by an extended naval struggle. It is far from clear that the U.S. would have won this battle given the prowess of German seapower at that time.

And yes, the war may have expanded to include other countries. I think particularly of the Austrians if U.S. troops were to actually land in Germany.

This might make an interesting scenario for someone to devolop for CIV III or Alpha Centaui.

Ned

	09-05-2002 06:42									#67
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Dom Pedro II I mean, this concept of "total war" is just NOT that common throughout history.

Yes, it is.

	09-05-2002 06:43									#68
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

1. I highly doubt it would have been possible to land troops in that day and age without Britain or some nearby country giving a location for American troops to supply themselves.

2. I don't think Germany would have just started this war just for the hell of it anyway. I mean, they certainly weren't stupid people, and there would be very little to gain without taking an enormous and very unlikely risk of trying to beat a huge country thousands of miles away.

	09-05-2002 06:48									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Actually, the total war concept isn't really that frequent throughout world history. Really only World War I and II saw that type of mobilization of society, economy, and military to make the single "war machine". The only thing that comes closest to it is Robespierre's revolutionary French republic during its wars.

The very idea that Germany or the United States would actually waste the time and VAST resources to try to conquer the other is entirely beyond reason. War with each other: Yes. But trying to successfully invade and occupy the other's country? Certainly not.

	09-05-2002 07:09									#70
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dom Pedro II Really only World War I and II saw that type of mobilization of society, economy, and military to make the single "war machine". The only thing that comes closest to it is Robespierre's revolutionary French republic during its wars.

I would argue that the American Civil War came closest to living out the ideals Clausewitz's ideas regarding absolute warfare and even those ideals didn't spring out of thin air being based on the campaigns of Napoleon and themes running throughout military history. The idea of making war upon an enemy's entire society is not new to military history.

	09-05-2002 07:11									#71
	Full PM-box? Change here!

But even still, at even the most intense part of the Napoleonic wars, the percentage of the population actually affected by the war was minimal.

	09-05-2002 07:44									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Doesn't matter. Both had a vested interest in containing German power, and would have jumped at the chance to do so if Germany attacked America. Britain did not want to go war at all with Germany in 1904. It almost didn't go to war with Germany in 1914... only invading neutral Belgium pushed them off the cliff. Though they really may have if the US was attacked.

Not wanting to go to war and not NEEDING to go to war, for national interests, are two entirely different things. The German unification caused alarm among many in Britain who saw it not only as a formidable trading adversary, but as the new supreme military power on the continent. The German army was universally regarded as Europe's best-trained, most intimidating fighting force.

Britain was happy to develop a close trading relationship with Germany if just to keep her closer, but Germany's aggressiveness towards France (again, the N. African flap over Morocco) and her build up of the Navy was alarming. In fact, it was for these reasons the entente was created.

Now, I surmise had Germany carried through on these plans, that would have been even more alarming for Britain, and anything they could do to weaken Germany's position on the continent would be jumped at. Especially since France almost certainly would have joined the United States as an ally and marched right towards Alsace-Lorraine for payback. Given that the bulk of Germany's forces would be engaged in the invasion of the U.S., France could mass her forces and probably be successful in attacking the Germans.

	09-05-2002 10:31									#73
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

We would have ripped their butts apart.

Americans are blood thirsty bastards. It's part of the pioneer heritage.

	10-05-2002 15:55									#74
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

And it was shown when said pioneer heritage came to action over Japan. Blood thirsty huns.

	10-05-2002 16:59									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: I think everyone has over looked one tiny little thing about this plan. The US President was Teddy Roosevelt. If Germany had tried anything like that Teddy would not have let this country let up till the doughboys were marching in Berlin. It wouldn't matter how many early victories the Germans may have enjoyed, Teddy would not have let them stand and would not have negotiated any peace except at the victory table where he would have dictated the terms. Whatever the size of our starting army the Germans would have run into the same problem they ran into later as did the japanese. We have a very good ability to crank up the industrial power of this country for war and an unprovoked attack on our Eastern cities would have made the anger we felt after Pearl Harbour look like a bad hair day.

You do know that in 1900, the USA wasn't a superpower yet. Without British/French support, it wouldn't have stood much of a chance if it wanted to defeat Germany completely.

In a one on one war between the USA and Germany, it would be a marginal victory for Germany. The Panama canal would have been captured by the Germans, but they wouldn't have been able to effectively invade the American homeland. At the same time, the Americans would have been powerless to retake Panama, and wouldn't even get the oportunity to invade the German homeland. So in the end, Germany would have gotten Panama and that's about it. Though it's unlikely of course that the French or British would have stayed out of the war.

Remember, this is 1900 not 1941.

	10-05-2002 17:29									#76
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Yeah, I think we should have invaded the Netherlands instead.

	10-05-2002 17:36									#77
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Saint Marcus You do know that in 1900, the USA wasn't a superpower yet. Without British/French support, it wouldn't have stood much of a chance if it wanted to defeat Germany completely. In a one on one war between the USA and Germany, it would be a marginal victory for Germany. The Panama canal would have been captured by the Germans, but they wouldn't have been able to effectively invade the American homeland. At the same time, the Americans would have been powerless to retake Panama, and wouldn't even get the oportunity to invade the German homeland. So in the end, Germany would have gotten Panama and that's about it. Though it's unlikely of course that the French or British would have stayed out of the war. Remember, this is 1900 not 1941.

A reasonably fair appraisal. There are a couple of other factors that might have had an appreciable impact however. Firstly, the Germans would have been at a large disadvantage by being on the offensive at such an enormous distance from their production centers. Without bases their ability to keep their navy operating would have been problematic, and their ability to keep their coal powered transports going would have been extremely problematic. So Germany's first move would be to secure a base of operations which would allow them to stockpile supplies near enough to the U.S. to blockade the U.S. Navy. That is an extremely tall order. Panama would have allowed them to strike both coasts with their fleet, but it is too far from either coast to maintain a decent blockade much less serve as a jumping off point for some sort of invasion. It is also a very long way from Germany.

Mexico on the other hand was an excellent choice if they could have talked the Mexican government into it. It has some good ports on both coasts, and one could strike both Panama and the U.S. fairly easily from there. It's only weakness would be it's surface transportation infrastructure which was pretty bad, and non-existent by German standards. This would have forced the Germans to make an amphibious invasion of the U.S. even if they had managed to acquire Mexico as a base of operations.

The U.S. would have had a lot of problems also. Namely a very small and out-dated Army, and an uneven and somewhat out-dated Navy. However the U.S. was the largest industrial power in the world already, and would be able to predominate militarily over time in a war of attrition, especially one where the Germans would not be able to project a significant portion of it's Army to engage the weak U.S. Army. At sea the U.S. would probably have been forced to play the weaker Navy by attacking commerce / supply lines and picking it's fights carefully to allow it's fleet to build it's strength before fighting for Naval supremacy. Interestingly it might well have been the birth of effective submarine warfare, for the U.S. was one of the leading countries in the development of the submarine, and the limited capabilities of the submarine of the time would have nonetheless allowed a defensive employment of them.

Without Panama, the U.S. would not be as effective at building up and training it's Navy, though the capability for West Coast cities to build ships at this point was less significant than it was to be later, so the net loss of shipbuilding to the whole Navy would have been negligible. Harrassment of the Eastern Seaboard would have definitely effected U.S. Naval operations, especially training. However the large number of good ports, their distance from one another, and the fact that there were many capable of building warships would have presented some opportunities for the Americans to strike back at what would have been a fairly large number of detached blockade groups.

It definitely would have been interesting. Number one industrial power against number 2.

	10-05-2002 17:53									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Yeah, I think we should have invaded the Netherlands instead.

Why? We gave you all those nice aircraft in WW1. You should be grateful to us.

	10-05-2002 17:54									#79
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

True again, thinking of Fokker planes

	10-05-2002 18:12									#80
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: True again, thinking of Fokker planes

Exactly. Without us, you will all be speaking French by now.

	10-05-2002 18:26									#81
	Increase Your PM Length

don't you just hate those dam* americans, when they are
so sure of them selves and with no reason

	10-05-2002 21:34									#82
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Ecthelion And it was shown when said pioneer heritage came to action over Japan. Blood thirsty huns.

Yes. It was also shown when Georgie Patton grabbed Rommel "by the nose and kicked him in the ass."

Scoreboard, baby...

	10-05-2002 21:36									#83
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Andemagne don't you just hate those dam* americans, when they are so sure of them selves and with no reason

Everybody hates a winner...

	10-05-2002 21:46									#84
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Saint Marcus You do know that in 1900, the USA wasn't a superpower yet. Without British/French support, it wouldn't have stood much of a chance if it wanted to defeat Germany completely.

In 1900, American industry outstripped every other nation in the world, including Germany. I have no doubt that America would have swiftly mobilized and dispatched with the German invasion with pretty minimal damage to American soil. This isn't jingoism, just the facts. Germany would have been outmatched in 1900, particularly 1906 (when this plan would have had to come to fruition). And once again, America would be able to call on Britian and France for help in Europe, thereby crippling Germany's war effort.

	10-05-2002 22:15									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: In 1900, American industry outstripped every other nation in the world, including Germany.

Production alone doesn't make a nation a superpower. America's army and navy were piss-poor, and the US certainly wasn't able to project it's power worldwide, unlike the Germans and British (who were superpowers).

Also, like I said, a quick win in Panama would be enough to ensure a marginal victory for the Germans, since it's unlikely the US could retake it.

	11-05-2002 08:00									#86
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Saint Marcus Production alone doesn't make a nation a superpower. America's army and navy were piss-poor, and the US certainly wasn't able to project it's power worldwide, unlike the Germans and British (who were superpowers). Also, like I said, a quick win in Panama would be enough to ensure a marginal victory for the Germans, since it's unlikely the US could retake it.

Wait a min., We had just finnish a war in case someone miss it. It was the war 1898 with Spain. We removed Spain from Cuba and PI. The PI is about 7,000 miles from the US. I just look this up. Tirpitz ordered the construction of 20 BBs between 1889 and 1904. Only 14 were completed by 1900. We had 6 with 3 more being built (laid down 1897). USS Texas, Maine, Indiana, Massachusetts, Oregon, and the Iowa. Granded these BBs were not the greatest in the world, but with a good crew and Capt. they would have done some dammage. Note: the Maine was sunk in Cuba. Another Note: TR was the President and he would have rally the troops to perform better than anyone else in his time. Also we had Jack Pershing the only 6 Star General in History to lead our troops. (In 1918 General Pershing was given the title General of the Armies that included British, French, and American Armies).

	11-05-2002 08:13									#87
	Increase Your PM Length

Actually in the early 1900s, the American navy was a force to deal with. It was either 2 or 3 since 1900. Britain, of course, was alway #1 .

	11-05-2002 08:14									#88
	Tired of ads?

Britain would have crushed them. mabe crushed the germans maybe start a premature WW1. we could've defended ourselves.

the Zimmerman telegram was quite frankly a joke. germany nor Austria had the manpower to put their own troops there and the mexican army...... hahaha

	11-05-2002 08:29									#89
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Believe it or not, this article actually made it to the second page of the local paper!

It appears that the Germans were going to rely on naval bombardment alone to subdue the Ameicans. A little over a decade earlier this had worked to subdue the Sultan of Zanzibar, so I guess they thought that it would work again in the Americas. Surely you can all see that this would never have worked. Zanzibar is an island country. Shelling the port and the forts put the ruler in direct danger. He surrendered in less than an hour. Shelling the US would have come no where near the American president. By the time he got the news the Germans would probably have exhausted their supply of shells. Sailing back to Germany the British fleet would have sent the entire squadron to the bottom of the ocean. Why? Because the US was Britain's largest area of investment. Before WW I the British actually had more capital invested in Wall Street than in the Imperial colonies.

	11-05-2002 08:37									#90
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Let's see.....

US Army?
- Smaller than most countries (even by 1914, it was only the 17th worldwide in size).
-Many Large State Militias.
-In 1901, there were still many, many US Civil War Vets who had seen warfare on a larger scale than, well, anyone. This provided a ready-made officer corps. (as it did in the Spanish-American War, notably with former Confederate General Wheeler, although there were many other vets.)
-Therefore, one can assume all the USA would have to do is delay the Germans from invading long enough to mobilize a national army. This, of course, falls to the....

USN
-Not very big in 1900, but certainly bigger than the German navy. Had just came through the Spanish-American war kicking ass and taking names.
-The North Atlantic is a big place. I'd wager the USN could raid and delay/stop altogether a German convoy.
-Of course, without a few years of all out funneling the economy towards war, the War won't end. Unless we include...

Coalition Building
The French would jump on the chance to screw around with the Germans. If they thought they'd get back the Alsace-lorraine, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to let the USA use Franch as a stageing point.

Conclusion
USA RUULZ, EUROPE DROOLZZ!!