Did the US make the correct decision to enter the First World War?

[Sheilbh]

Sure, the elites would definitely try to get German support to counter the US. However there aren't going to be popular revolutions overthrowing the government and setting up Hohenzollern monarchies.

Sure the elites may be pro-American but there's not going to be any revolutions overthrowing governments and setting up fascist military regimes.

[grumbler]

I don't get all this talk about Germany overthrowing pro-US governments in the Caribbean and Latin America.  What's their motive?  They certainly don't need the trade, and pissing off the US seems like a needlessly reckless thing to do.

The Pacific?  I could see them doing something there.  latin America?  No.  Too difficult, too risky, and too many downsides.

[Agelastus]

I don't get all this talk about Germany overthrowing pro-US governments in the Caribbean and Latin America.  What's their motive?  They certainly don't need the trade, and pissing off the US seems like a needlessly reckless thing to do.

The Pacific?  I could see them doing something there.  latin America?  No.  Too difficult, too risky, and too many downsides.

Possibly from a combination of an improved German position in the Americas with Colonial gains from France and Wilhelmine Germany's known penchant for attempted strong-arming, even of Great Powers (see Venezuela, Morocco etc.)

[grumbler]

I don't get all this talk about Germany overthrowing pro-US governments in the Caribbean and Latin America.  What's their motive?  They certainly don't need the trade, and pissing off the US seems like a needlessly reckless thing to do.

The Pacific?  I could see them doing something there.  latin America?  No.  Too difficult, too risky, and too many downsides.

Possibly from a combination of an improved German position in the Americas with Colonial gains from France and Wilhelmine Germany's known penchant for attempted strong-arming, even of Great Powers (see Venezuela, Morocco etc.)

Why would Germany get French colonies in the Americas, and why would Wilhelm want to repeat the embarrassment he suffered in Venezuela?  This all sounds like speculation driven by a need to justify a US involvement in the First World War.  France's "colonies" in the new World, other than poverty-stricken French Guiana, consisted of a couple of Caribbean islands of about a thousand total square miles with a couple hundred thousand inhabitants,  and some islands in the St Lawrence Seaway.

Germany's colonial ambitions in 1916 were to get her prewar colonies back.  Her response to Wilson mentioned nothing about French colonies in the New World.

[Razgovory]

I don't get all this talk about Germany overthrowing pro-US governments in the Caribbean and Latin America.  What's their motive?  They certainly don't need the trade, and pissing off the US seems like a needlessly reckless thing to do.

The Pacific?  I could see them doing something there.  latin America?  No.  Too difficult, too risky, and too many downsides.

The Kaiser did make some wild statements during the Spanish American war, but he probably made some wild statements about conquering the moon at some time.  Germany would be in no position to take European possessions in the Caribbean and even less to influence Latin America.  A German victory doesn't adversely affect US world standing more then an Entente victory.  A longer war probably helps us in the long run. 

[Sheilbh]

Again I disagree. Germany would have become the dominant maritime power in the Atlantic.

Obviously it's not history so we don't know what would happen and the US and Germany could have cooperated very well, but equally that may not have happened. But that is of at least as much influence and threat to the US as Japan in the Pacific.

[jimmy olsen]

Again I disagree. Germany would have become the dominant maritime power in the Atlantic.

Obviously it's not history so we don't know what would happen and the US and Germany could have cooperated very well, but equally that may not have happened. But that is of at least as much influence and threat to the US as Japan in the Pacific.

Given that America exists in this scenario, I'm not sure how you see that happening.

[Eddie Teach]

An isolationist America doesn't need such a strong navy.

[CountDeMoney]

I don't get all this talk about Germany overthrowing pro-US governments in the Caribbean and Latin America.  What's their motive?  They certainly don't need the trade, and pissing off the US seems like a needlessly reckless thing to do.

The Pacific?  I could see them doing something there.  latin America?  No.  Too difficult, too risky, and too many downsides.

The Kaiser did make some wild statements during the Spanish American war, but he probably made some wild statements about conquering the moon at some time.  Germany would be in no position to take European possessions in the Caribbean and even less to influence Latin America.  A German victory doesn't adversely affect US world standing more then an Entente victory.  A longer war probably helps us in the long run.

The Germans were balls-deep into Haiti prior to the war, in both commerce and government; so much so that we deployed troops in 1915 to keep them from using the port.

[Sheilbh]

An isolationist America doesn't need such a strong navy.

Yes it does. Especially if the Royal Navy is severely restricted.

Given that America exists in this scenario, I'm not sure how you see that happening.

The US started construction on their big navy in 1916 I think.

If the US doesn't enter and the Germans get their victory goals - reducing the Royal Navy, colonies in Southern Africa, control of the North Sea coast - then they've got a large headstart on you. Chances are - though obviously this is all a guess - there would possibly be some sort of clash as the US built up her navy.

[Eddie Teach]

Yes it does. Especially if the Royal Navy is severely restricted.

That just means the UK is less of a threat. 

We don't need to be as strong as Germany to be not worth picking a fight with. And we certainly wouldn't have to be as strong as post-WW2 America.

[grumbler]

The Germans were balls-deep into Haiti prior to the war, in both commerce and government; so much so that we deployed troops in 1915 to keep them from using the port.

The German presence in Haiti was trivial except in a few retail areas, and there were plenty of reasons beyond fear of some invisible German fleet for the US to invade.  Germany was in no position to be a major maritime power, let alone a dominant one, no matter what some treaty said.  France still isn't the dominant military in the Atlantic, almost 100 years after Versailles.

[grumbler]

If the US doesn't enter and the Germans get their victory goals - reducing the Royal Navy, colonies in Southern Africa, control of the North Sea coast - then they've got a large headstart on you. Chances are - though obviously this is all a guess - there would possibly be some sort of clash as the US built up her navy.

Germany wasn't going to get a reduction of the Royal Navy, nor was it going to get RN ships with which to become dominant itself.  What it could likely get out of a victory was a demilitarized french border and a demilitarized Belgium, a return of its African colonies and permission to purchase the Belgian and Portuguese colonies, and and expansion of the German trade bloc in eastern Europe (and probably into the Middle East).  Germany couldn't possibly afford the diversion of resources needed to become "the dominant maritime power in the Atlantic" with all of those other opportunities beckoning.

[Barrister]

An isolationist America doesn't need such a strong navy.

Yes it does. Especially if the Royal Navy is severely restricted.

Given that America exists in this scenario, I'm not sure how you see that happening.

The US started construction on their big navy in 1916 I think.

If the US doesn't enter and the Germans get their victory goals - reducing the Royal Navy, colonies in Southern Africa, control of the North Sea coast - then they've got a large headstart on you. Chances are - though obviously this is all a guess - there would possibly be some sort of clash as the US built up her navy.

How does Germany get a "reduced Royal Navy"?  They had no means of touching Great Britain.  Even if the Germans force France to capitulate they couldn't impose their will on Britain.

[Sheilbh]

How does Germany get a "reduced Royal Navy"?  They had no means of touching Great Britain.  Even if the Germans force France to capitulate they couldn't impose their will on Britain.

This is all from Raz saying an Entente or Alliance victory made no difference. So as I said at the time if they won and imposed their terms this is what I think would happen and it would have led to tension with the US at least as much as Japan's part in the Entente victory.

I don't think the Germans could have won but I think a Germany victory wouldn't have been in the US's interests.