If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?

[WolfBear]

If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?

Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.

For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).

Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?

Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

[Rob]

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.
For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).
Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?
Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

When I did a TL based on this concept the US did not even think of quitting right away. I had two alternate endings - one where the war is stalemated between the elephant and two whales for several years until the "carpet nuking" of Germany, and another where, frustrated by not being able to get onto the continent for several years, the war winds down with Britain and the US leaving the continent in Hitler's hands.

[WolfBear]

Post by Rob

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.
For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).
Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?
Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

When I did a TL based on this concept the US did not even think of quitting right away. I had two alternate endings - one where the war is stalemated between the elephant and two whales for several years until the "carpet nuking" of Germany, and another where, frustrated by not being able to get onto the continent for several years, the war winds down with Britain and the US leaving the continent in Hitler's hands.

What was the PoD for your TL?

Also, why exactly did the Soviet Union not enter the war in your TL? Was it because Hitler had a change of mind and didn't attack the Soviet Union?

[Rob]

Post by WolfBear

Post by Rob

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.
For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).
Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?
Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

When I did a TL based on this concept the US did not even think of quitting right away. I had two alternate endings - one where the war is stalemated between the elephant and two whales for several years until the "carpet nuking" of Germany, and another where, frustrated by not being able to get onto the continent for several years, the war winds down with Britain and the US leaving the continent in Hitler's hands.

What was the PoD for your TL?

My PoD was the Germans launching submarine warfare against all shipping to the Allies from November 1939, as proposed by Admiral Raeder, unbound by any geographic restrictions, thus soon resulting in sinkings of American ships and ships close to the North American East Coast in November and December of 1940.

The US finds this too hard to take and declares war over it.

Post by WolfBear
Also, why exactly did the Soviet Union not enter the war in your TL? Was it because Hitler had a change of mind and didn't attack the Soviet Union?

Yes - Because, even though attacking the USSR is his ultimate objective, Hitler *is* facing a tougher situation by the fall-winter of 1940 than OTL. Yes France has fallen, but Britain, the US and the overseas French Empire are still in a coalition against him, and Italy has chosen to stay on the sidelines. With the Anglo-American-French coalition, even the Japanese are staying on the sidelines, not bullying their way into Indochina. Hitler wants to finish that war with the maritime powers before starting the war in the east.

To find these ancient discussion threads (from 2000 & 2002), google under "Gerhard Weinberg's" and "WWII"

[The Horny Goat]

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the
U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.
For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).
Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?
Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

My question is if the US enters the war within a week of 3 Sept 1939
(perhaps on 10 Sept - the day Canada did) would Stalin honour the Nazi
Soviet pact and occupy eastern Poland? This could make a VERY
interesting scenario as Soviet resources were extremely important to
Hitler in 1939-40.

It would be even more interesting if the US guaranteed Norwegian
neutrality but to be fair it should be noted that the US army was
minuscule in 1939 and didn't really have the logistics to deploy
overseas till much later.

The US didn't really have much ability to project overseas and the US
occupation of Greenland and Iceland were pretty much the limit of US
overseas force before Pearl Harbour.

[WolfBear]

Post by The Horny Goat

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the
U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.
For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).
Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?
Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

My question is if the US enters the war within a week of 3 Sept 1939
(perhaps on 10 Sept - the day Canada did) would Stalin honour the Nazi
Soviet pact and occupy eastern Poland? This could make a VERY
interesting scenario as Soviet resources were extremely important to
Hitler in 1939-40.

Yes, I would think that he would. After all, even if the U.S. declared war on Nazi Germany in 1939, it would very likely have little appetite to fight the Soviet Union as well.

Post by The Horny Goat
It would be even more interesting if the US guaranteed Norwegian
neutrality but to be fair it should be noted that the US army was
minuscule in 1939 and didn't really have the logistics to deploy
overseas till much later.

To be honest, even a U.S. which is allied with Britain and France in 1939 would probably be hesitant to throw out guarantees left and right. After all, as I previously said, the U.S. would want Britain and France to do most of the actual fighting.

Post by The Horny Goat
The US didn't really have much ability to project overseas and the US
occupation of Greenland and Iceland were pretty much the limit of US
overseas force before Pearl Harbour.

Yes, this is certainly correct.

[The Horny Goat]

Post by WolfBear

Post by The Horny Goat
My question is if the US enters the war within a week of 3 Sept 1939
(perhaps on 10 Sept - the day Canada did) would Stalin honour the Nazi
Soviet pact and occupy eastern Poland? This could make a VERY
interesting scenario as Soviet resources were extremely important to
Hitler in 1939-40.

Yes, I would think that he would. After all, even if the U.S. declared war on Nazi Germany in 1939, it would very likely have little appetite to fight the Soviet Union as well.

I'm not suggesting the US had an army remotely capable of fighting the
Soviets in 1939 - just that a combined alliance of Britain France AND
America might have been intimidating.

Post by WolfBear

Post by The Horny Goat
It would be even more interesting if the US guaranteed Norwegian
neutrality but to be fair it should be noted that the US army was
minuscule in 1939 and didn't really have the logistics to deploy
overseas till much later.

To be honest, even a U.S. which is allied with Britain and France in 1939 would probably be hesitant to throw out guarantees left and right. After all, as I previously said, the U.S. would want Britain and France to do most of the actual fighting.

Post by The Horny Goat
The US didn't really have much ability to project overseas and the US
occupation of Greenland and Iceland were pretty much the limit of US
overseas force before Pearl Harbour.

Yes, this is certainly correct.

I personally think US 1939 entry is a daffy scenario as the growth in
US arms didn't take place until after that. Sure they had 50 WW1
destroyers and had taken some steps in modernizing the USN but
suggesting the US was ready for war in 1939 is questionable at best.

Everybody knew the US had the ability to grow their military over
12-24 months but it was not the world beater in 1939 that it was in
1944-45.

[David Tenner]

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the
U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the
U.S. entering World War II in 1939.

[snippage]


(1) Why would US membership in the League necessarily mean the US would
join in the war in September 1939? Look at the list of League of Nations
members at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_League_of_Nations The
majority of them were still members in September 1939. How many declared
war on Geramny then? Moreover,

"Germany’s 1939 invasion of Poland never came up in Geneva. Respect for
the League had fallen so far that the Gestapo invaded the home of the
League high commissioner in Danzig the night before the war began, and
when Britain and France sent in notifications of their declarations of
war, they pointedly did not invoke the Covenant of the League of Nations--
Part I of the Treaty of Versailles. Instead, they cited the Kellogg-Briand
Pact--a 1928 treaty renouncing war that had been signed or ratified by
every world power and almost all independent nations--and their guarantees
to Poland." http://www.historynet.com/joseph-avenols-betrayal-of-the-
league-of-nations.htm

(2) Ah, but you say, things would be different if the Senate had agreed to
the Treaty of Guarantee. But look more carefully at the Treaty of
Guarantee (which the British ratified but only contingent on US
ratification--which of course did not happen): If articles 42 and 43 of
the Versailles Treaty (dealing with demilitirization of the Rhineland)
"may not at first provide adequate security and protection to France, the
United States of America shall be bound to come immediately to her
assistance in the event of any *unprovoked movement of aggression* [my
emphasis--DT] against her being made by Germany."
https://books.google.com/books?id=PN8qAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA7

Is it necessary to emphasize what a huge loophole this leaves? I think
Lloyd George said it all about the similar British commitment:

"Lloyd George assured Botha thai the treaty of guarantee committed Britain
to assist France only in the case of clear, unprovoked, and premeditated
aggression as had been the case in 1914. Britain would be the judge of
that and would not be drawn into controversies that did not concern it.
Irresponsible French policies would not activate the commitment..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=zqj-oHp4KsgC&pg=PA598

If America is in an isolationist mood, of course it can easily find that
France was not the victim of "unprovoked aggression." The
relmilitarization of the Rhineland was for example claimed by the Germans
to have been "provoked" by the Franco-Soviet pact, whcih was allegedly in
violatio of the League Covenant and the Locarno Treaty Hitler's arguments
to this effect were specious, but not without a superficial plausibility,
as Hugh Ragsdale has noted in *The Soviets, the Munich Crisis, and the
Coming of World War II,* pp. 13-14.
https://books.google.com/books?id=mBDyAM8GpYsC&pg=PA13 I doubt that there
would be much of a mood in the US--where isolationism would be strong in
1936 with or without League membership, and with or without the Treaty of
Guarantee--to take action any more than the British did.

And of course in September 1939 it was France (and the UK) which had
declared war on Germany. If the US did not join in the British and French
guarantees to Poland, it would have no legal oblgation to join them in the
war, or to regard Germany as of September 1939 as the aggressor against
France (however clearly it was an aggressor aginst Poland).

[WolfBear]

Post by David Tenner

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the
U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the
U.S. entering World War II in 1939.

[snippage]
(1) Why would US membership in the League necessarily mean the US would
join in the war in September 1939? Look at the list of League of Nations
members at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_the_League_of_Nations The
majority of them were still members in September 1939. How many declared
war on Geramny then? Moreover,
"Germany’s 1939 invasion of Poland never came up in Geneva. Respect for
the League had fallen so far that the Gestapo invaded the home of the
League high commissioner in Danzig the night before the war began, and
when Britain and France sent in notifications of their declarations of
war, they pointedly did not invoke the Covenant of the League of Nations--
Part I of the Treaty of Versailles. Instead, they cited the Kellogg-Briand
Pact--a 1928 treaty renouncing war that had been signed or ratified by
every world power and almost all independent nations--and their guarantees
to Poland." http://www.historynet.com/joseph-avenols-betrayal-of-the-
league-of-nations.htm

Completely agreed that being a League of Nations in itself is unlikely to result in a U.S. declaration of war against Nazi Germany in 1939.

Post by David Tenner
(2) Ah, but you say, things would be different if the Senate had agreed to
the Treaty of Guarantee. But look more carefully at the Treaty of
Guarantee (which the British ratified but only contingent on US
ratification--which of course did not happen): If articles 42 and 43 of
the Versailles Treaty (dealing with demilitirization of the Rhineland)
"may not at first provide adequate security and protection to France, the
United States of America shall be bound to come immediately to her
assistance in the event of any *unprovoked movement of aggression* [my
emphasis--DT] against her being made by Germany."
https://books.google.com/books?id=PN8qAQAAMAAJ&pg=PA7
Is it necessary to emphasize what a huge loophole this leaves? I think
"Lloyd George assured Botha that the treaty of guarantee committed Britain
to assist France only in the case of clear, unprovoked, and premeditated
aggression as had been the case in 1914. Britain would be the judge of
that and would not be drawn into controversies that did not concern it.
Irresponsible French policies would not activate the commitment..."
https://books.google.com/books?id=zqj-oHp4KsgC&pg=PA598

Out of curiosity--did Germany invade France in 1914 before France declared war on it, or did the French declaration of war in 1914 come first?

Post by David Tenner
If America is in an isolationist mood, of course it can easily find that
France was not the victim of "unprovoked aggression." The
relmilitarization of the Rhineland was for example claimed by the Germans
to have been "provoked" by the Franco-Soviet pact, whcih was allegedly in
violation of the League Covenant and the Locarno Treaty Hitler's arguments
to this effect were specious, but not without a superficial plausibility,
as Hugh Ragsdale has noted in *The Soviets, the Munich Crisis, and the
Coming of World War II,* pp. 13-14.
https://books.google.com/books?id=mBDyAM8GpYsC&pg=PA13 I doubt that there
would be much of a mood in the US--where isolationism would be strong in
1936 with or without League membership, and with or without the Treaty of
Guarantee--to take action any more than the British did.

I agree with your general point here, David.

Also, though, would there have even been a 1936 Franco-Soviet Pact in this TL?

Post by David Tenner
And of course in September 1939 it was France (and the UK) which had
declared war on Germany. If the US did not join in the British and French
guarantees to Poland, it would have no legal oblgation to join them in the
war, or to regard Germany as of September 1939 as the aggressor against
France (however clearly it was an aggressor aginst Poland).

Yes, you are very much correct in regards to this. Also, I think that it would still be unlikely for the U.S. to join the Anglo-French guarantee to Poland in early 1939 in this TL. That said, though:

1. Would Britain and France still be willing to make a guarantee to Poland in this TL? After all, losing one's guarantee of U.S. military assistance might not have been the most appealing move for France.

2. Could the U.S. have tried to split the difference in regards to this by declaring war on Nazi Germany in 1939 but also refusing to implement a draft at home and thus only sending its Navy, volunteers (as in, in the form of a second BEF), and supplies (food, military equipment, et cetera)? After all, one would think that an open break with U.S. allies Britain and France might be hard for some Americans to swallow; after all, don't Americans have a sense of honor?

Of course, with the 1940 election being relatively close, the U.S. could--at least initially--still decide to remain neutral in 1939. However, in such a scenario, the U.S. would still be committed to the Franco-British cause in all ways short of war; for instance, we might very well see an earlier Lend-Lease in this TL as well as the U.S. government encouraging any Americans who want to fight to join, say, the Canadian Army or the French Foreign Legion.

However, I still want my main question addressed here--*if* the U.S. is willing to muster the necessary political will to declare war on Nazi Germany in 1939, does it make peace with Nazi Germany if France still falls?

Also, in this TL, would France have been willing to continue the fight from North Africa and its other colonies had the U.S. already been in the war since 1939?

Any thoughts on all of this?

Post by David Tenner
--
David Tenner

[t***@gmail.com]

Post by WolfBear
If the U.S. enters World War II in 1939 and France still falls, does the U.S. make peace with Nazi Germany afterwards?
Also, for reference, there are two good PoDs which could result in the U.S. entering World War II in 1939. First, Woodrow Wilson's stroke in late 1919 could kill him, thus making VP Thomas Marshall U.S. President. In such a scenario, Marshall might have been more willing to compromise with Lodge and the Republicans than Wilson was and thus might have gotten U.S. entry into the League of Nations with reservations as well as U.S. Senate ratification of the Security Treaty with France (which would have obliged the U.S. to come to France's aid in the event of unprovoked German aggression). Meanwhile, another PoD which could result in U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 would be if Charles Evans Hughes won in 1916 and successfully got the Democrats in the U.S. Senate to agree to League of Nations membership and an alliance with Britain and France after the end of World War I. However, this second PoD is risky because, with a Hughes victory in 1916, the Democrats will likely control the U.S. Presidency between 1921 and 1933, which in turn might have meant no Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act and thus a less severe Great Depression--something which could have completely butterflied away the Nazi rise to power in Germany--and thus World War II--in the first place.
For the record, in this TL, the U.S. would enter World War II in 1939 but would only send volunteers (probably in the form of a U.S. Expeditionary Force) and supplies (food, weapons, military equipment, et cetera) to Britain and France--with the U.S. expecting Britain and France to do most of the actual work in defeating Nazi Germany (even in this TL, I really don't see the American people accepting large-scale U.S. casualties for Poland).
Anyway, if France still falls in 1940 in this TL, does the U.S. decide to make peace with Nazi Germany shortly afterwards (and try encouraging its ally Britain to do the same)? Or does the U.S. follow Britain's lead (if Winston Churchill is still at the helm in Britain in 1940 in this TL) and fight on even after the Fall of France (even if this would mean having the U.S. take a lot more casualties in World War II than was originally expected)?
Also, how exactly would a U.S. entry into World War II in 1939 have affected the course of the war as well as the aftermath of the war?

https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI
https://groups.google.com/d/topic/soc.history.what-if/CWIic_ncdeI