Political Crossfire Forums

Wyatt Earp · Joined: 03 Jul 2006 Posts: 358

There would be no swarming of Illegal immigrants up from Mexico, Who would want to go to a "Canada? like USA?

battleax86 · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 4997 Location: Texas

It's pretty difficult to rewrite 200+ years of history when you take out such a significant event, but to answer the question, I think that today's United States would be about the size that it was in 1783 and joined up with Canada into a single nation that gained independence and joined the Commonwealth in the late 1800s or early 20th century.

France would probably still be a monarchy, albeit a weak one controlled by the French nobility. That means no Napoleonic Wars, although Britain and France would still be squabbling just as they had for the previous 750 years.

European colonialism would likely still be in full swing, as there would be no Monroe Doctrine, no American-inspired uprisings, no Spanish-American War, and none of the other anti-colonial influences brought about by the USA's existence, which means that European nations would still be having wars with each other every so often over distant terrorities, although they would be a lot less bloody without some of the weaponry that was invented for the American Civil War or descended from that weaponry (repeating rifles, Gatling guns, machine guns, etc).

Mexico and South America would probably be independent of Spain, but mostly under the control of people who gave no pretense of democracy.

Mexico would be about twice its size and Canada would be building a wall on the Oregon-California border to keep the illegals out.

We would still be industrialized. We got most of that technology from the British anyway and the same American minds who invented the other technology could just as easily have done it under a British or Canadian flag.

The South probably would have rebelled in the 1830s when London outlawed slavery, but that's a whole 'nother cans of worms that I won't get into.

The Central Powers would have come out on the winning side of World War I (which was a purely European power struggle), meaning no World War II, as the Kaiser's Germany forces France and Britain to pay modest reparations and fork over a couple of African colonies. Adolph Hitler is honorably discharged at the rank of sergeant in 1919 and executed in 1921 for attempting to subvert the government.

Israel probably wouldn't have been resurrected in 1948. The Jews would still be dispersed across Europe and the Americas, still facing a similar situation that they faced in the 1920s. The Europeans would be fighting the Arabs, the Turks, and each other over the entire Middle East, assuming they found some value in a desert subcontinent filled with tons of a useless, black, oily substance.

I don't know where to go from there. World War II and the events leading up to it so drastically altered the world that it's impossible to predict what would happen in the 1940s and after without the United States existing.

thundertaker · Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 6:47 am Post subject:

Quote: although they would be a lot less bloody without some of the weaponry that was invented for the American Civil War or descended from that weaponry (repeating rifles, Gatling guns, machine guns, etc).

These inventions would have happened anyway sooner or later once the basic principles behing them were understood. In the same way Thomas Edison and Joseph Swan invented the lightbulb almost simultaneously, weapons technology would have advanced anyway. If Sir Hiram Maxim hadn't invented the machinegun, somebody else would have understood it's principles and applied them. I'm pretty sure there would have been a continuous arms race between the European powers in a world of industrialisation with each side trying to gain technological superiority over the other.

Also, there is no way in hell Germany would have won world war one, with or without America. They were blockaded and starved of resources and didn't have the manpower resources of the British and French Empires......

antonio62 · Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:01 am Post subject:

battleax86 wrote: The Central Powers would have come out on the winning side of World War I (which was a purely European power struggle), meaning no World War II, as the Kaiser's Germany forces France and Britain to pay modest reparations and fork over a couple of African colonies. Adolph Hitler is honorably discharged at the rank of sergeant in 1919 and executed in 1921 for attempting to subvert the government.

The central powers were doomed as soon as the Schliefiln plan failed. they would starve, run out of men, run out of resources and run out of equipment the same as they did anyway and loose.

battleax86 · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 4997 Location: Texas

thundertaker wrote: Quote: although they would be a lot less bloody without some of the weaponry that was invented for the American Civil War or descended from that weaponry (repeating rifles, Gatling guns, machine guns, etc).

These inventions would have happened anyway sooner or later once the basic principles behing them were understood. In the same way Thomas Edison and Joseph Swan invented the lightbulb almost simultaneously, weapons technology would have advanced anyway. If Sir Hiram Maxim hadn't invented the machinegun, somebody else would have understood it's principles and applied them. I'm pretty sure there would have been a continuous arms race between the European powers in a world of industrialisation with each side trying to gain technological superiority over the other.
Necessity is the mother of invention and a long-standing, low-intensity conflict among European nations that occasionally flares up every now and then, such as what happened in the 17th and 18th centuries, wouldn't have provided the same sense of urgency as the American Civil War. Yes, they may have been invented later on, just as nuclear technology might have been invented without World War II, but it's unlikely that they would have shown up for at least several decades, if not centuries, down the road.

thundertaker wrote: Also, there is no way in hell Germany would have won world war one, with or without America. They were blockaded and starved of resources and didn't have the manpower resources of the British and French Empires......
You're thinking of a World War I with machine guns, which caused the trench warfare that made it a stalemate (one in which Germany had a slight advantage) up until the United States entered the war. Take those things away and you've got another late 19th century war. I would see Germany winning such a conflict fairly quickly.

thundertaker · Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 8:22 am Post subject:

Quote: You're thinking of a World War I with machine guns, which caused the trench warfare and made it a stalemate (one in which Germany had a slight advantage) up until US troops arrived. Take those things away and you've got another late 19th century war. I would see Germany winning such a conflict fairly quickly.

Not neccessarily. Sir Hiram Maxim produced the machinegun with the European market in mind. He was pondering what to invent to make himself rich in the 1880s and a friend told him he should invent a machine that could kill a lot of people very quickly, because that is what the European militaries were looking for.....

angusrae · Joined: 24 Feb 2005 Posts: 974 Location: Falkirk Scotland

And just to add to Thundertaker post he develop the Maxim gun in London for that european market

antonio62 · Posted: Fri Jul 07, 2006 10:40 am Post subject:

battleax86 wrote: You're thinking of a World War I with machine guns, which caused the trench warfare that made it a stalemate (one in which Germany had a slight advantage) up until the United States entered the war. Take those things away and you've got another late 19th century war. I would see Germany winning such a conflict fairly quickly.

The Germans never had an advantage they were doomed to failure.

battleax86 · Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 4997 Location: Texas

thundertaker wrote: Quote: You're thinking of a World War I with machine guns, which caused the trench warfare and made it a stalemate (one in which Germany had a slight advantage) up until US troops arrived. Take those things away and you've got another late 19th century war. I would see Germany winning such a conflict fairly quickly.

Not neccessarily. Sir Hiram Maxim produced the machinegun with the European market in mind. He was pondering what to invent to make himself rich in the 1880s and a friend told him he should invent a machine that could kill a lot of people very quickly, because that is what the European militaries were looking for.....
Yes, but do you think that technology would have made the jump from single-shot rifles to machine guns without the intermediary step of repeating rifles? The repeating rifle likely laid a foundation for Maxim to work off of. Without the American Civil War, that step doesn't get taken until much later and it's doubtful that machine guns would have made it to World War I.

antonio62 wrote: The Germans never had an advantage they were doomed to failure.
They made it within 75 miles of Paris. Their military certainly had a better time of it than the French. The French and British were fortunate to have machine guns, which allowed them to hunker down in their trenches and keep the Germans from advancing further for most of the war. Even then, the Germans had great success in the spring of 1918, during Operation Michael. If it weren't for fresh American divisions showing up when they did and the later German mistake of launching Operation Marne (which led to the first successful Allied offensive of the war), the Germans might have forced a peace more favorable to Germany than to France or Britain. Without the machine gun, with essentially held off the German army for four years until the Americans showed up, I would see a German victory before 1916 at the latest.

thundertaker · Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 6:36 am Post subject:

The Germans completely exhausted their manpower reserves during the Spring offensive, and lost most of their best troops, and lost equipment that couldn't be replaced, thanks to the Royal Navy starving the Germans of resources. The allies could replace this manpower and equipment, the Germans could not. The German objective was to break the French and German armies before significant numbers of americans arrived. They were halted before this happened.

Though to be honest, the Spring Offensive would never have happened if it wasn't for the prospect of the americans turning up. The allies would have negotiated peace with the Germans in 1916 if there was no hope of the americans entering the war.
As Winston Churchill said, it would have been a better thing if the americans had minded their own business in that war.

As for whether machineguns would have been invented, I think they probably would have done. Military technology evolved throughout the late 19th century without the benefit of major wars to spur them.
The Machine gun was invented in about 1885, by 1914, I'm pretty sure somebody would have wised up to the concept of inventing a wondergun that spat out lots of bullets at once without the benefit of the civil war. The European militaries were always looking for ways to equip their colonial armies to defeat the largest number of native rebels with the smallest number of their own troops. Especially after debacles like Isandwhala in 1879.
Besides which, I don't understand were you are coming from. The operating principles of a machinegun (i.e. blowback recoil) are alien to anything used during the american civil war.....

antonio62 · Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 8:57 am Post subject:

battleax86 wrote: They made it within 75 miles of Paris. Their military certainly had a better time of it than the French. The French and British were fortunate to have machine guns, which allowed them to hunker down in their trenches and keep the Germans from advancing further for most of the war. Even then, the Germans had great success in the spring of 1918, during Operation Michael. If it weren't for fresh American divisions showing up when they did and the later German mistake of launching Operation Marne (which led to the first successful Allied offensive of the war), the Germans might have forced a peace more favorable to Germany than to France or Britain. Without the machine gun, with essentially held off the German army for four years until the Americans showed up, I would see a German victory before 1916 at the latest.

The German people were starving and they were running put of men, equipment and resources to build new equipment. The only way they could hope to come close to anything like a win (it wouldn't be a win because they could never hope to defeat Britain) would be if they overran France and Russia. They could never hope to overrun France and without the Russian revolution conquering Russia also would be impossible. Germany was doomed to failure from the start.

.locke. · Joined: 10 Jul 2006 Posts: 89 Location: southwest ohio

i wouldnt say they were doomed from the start. :? they did make i within 75 miles of paris. but had they come just a little bit closer and captured paris its Possible the rest of the country wouldv collapsed.... key word possible

antonio62 · Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2006 5:30 pm Post subject:

.locke. wrote: i wouldnt say they were doomed from the start. :? they did make i within 75 miles of paris. but had they come just a little bit closer and captured paris its Possible the rest of the country wouldv collapsed.... key word possible

They were never going to reach there. To do that would leave them weak on the eastern front meaning the Russians would advance. There supply lines would be stretched. It was doomed to failure. The only way the plan could have succeeded was if the Italians had joined the war at the start on Germanys side. The plan was conceived thinking the Italians would be there to help making victory possible. Without them Germany could never win that and therefore could never hope to win the war.

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4649 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

Maybe if Greece had joined in 1939 as opposed to flip-flopping between pro Axis & pro Allied.......

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4649 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

Maybe if Greece had joined in 1939 as opposed to flip-flopping between pro Axis & pro Allied....... Greece was the only allie that your country have in Europe in 1940 when your American cousins pretent that they didnt understant what was going on...

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

Maybe if Greece had joined in 1939 as opposed to flip-flopping between pro Axis & pro Allied....... Greece was the only allie that your country have in Europe in 1940 when your American cousins pretent that they didnt understant what was going on...

Read some history and you'll see that you're mistaken re the Americans 'not understanding' what was going on; the UK was already receiving US aid and the USN was fighting and losing ships and men in the Atlantic before December 1941. However I don't want to impugn the great efforts made by Greece - but nor should you try to belittle what the US did.

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4649 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

Maybe if Greece had joined in 1939 as opposed to flip-flopping between pro Axis & pro Allied....... Greece was the only allie that your country have in Europe in 1940 when your American cousins pretent that they didnt understant what was going on...

Read some history and you'll see that you're mistaken re the Americans 'not understanding' what was going on; the UK was already receiving US aid and the USN was fighting and losing ships and men in the Atlantic before December 1941. However I don't want to impugn the great efforts made by Greece - but nor should you try to belittle what the US did. Actually what i was truying to do was give credits where it belongs.And the greatest gretit for WWII victory belong to the British.

Now as a British patriot as you say you are i didnt understant why you didnt like what i post...

DSwain · Joined: 09 Jun 2006 Posts: 3552

Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

Maybe if Greece had joined in 1939 as opposed to flip-flopping between pro Axis & pro Allied....... Greece was the only allie that your country have in Europe in 1940 when your American cousins pretent that they didnt understant what was going on...

Read some history and you'll see that you're mistaken re the Americans 'not understanding' what was going on; the UK was already receiving US aid and the USN was fighting and losing ships and men in the Atlantic before December 1941. However I don't want to impugn the great efforts made by Greece - but nor should you try to belittle what the US did. Actually what i was truying to do was give credits where it belongs.And the greatest gretit for WWII victory belong to the British.

Now as a British patriot as you say you are i didnt understant why you didnt like what i post...

Because of your sneering anti-American post - I'm not the sort of patriot who feels better about his country by seeing his allies being unfairly criticised.

Achilles The Myrmidon · Joined: 20 Nov 2004 Posts: 4649 Location: Hellas

DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Achilles The Myrmidon wrote: DSwain wrote: Spider wrote: Perhaps I got a little snappish there. This is just a very, very old peeve of mine. I studied at the University of Nottingham for 2 years, and it seems that I spent about half my time listening to people explain to me how we've accomplished about nill, in the final analysis. I think it gave me a complex. And maybe those people had a complex about me as well.

My apologies for the outpouring of indignation. If you'll excuse me, I've got barbeque to eat, beer to drink, etc :-D

Totally understood - the stupid anti-Americanism of some Brits turns me cold.

I'd like to share with you a letter in this morning's 'Daily Telegraph' - in response to an opinion poll that says that increasing numbers of Britons find Americans to be vulgar and crude.

"SIR - Before we condemn America, during the celebration of the 230th anniversary of its independence, let us not forget that, if it wasn't for America, we would all be speaking German or Russian."

I can do nothing but agree with that! WWII didnt start in 1942.If America stood from the beginning against Hitler like Britain did maybe we could avoid WWII...

Maybe if Greece had joined in 1939 as opposed to flip-flopping between pro Axis & pro Allied....... Greece was the only allie that your country have in Europe in 1940 when your American cousins pretent that they didnt understant what was going on...

Read some history and you'll see that you're mistaken re the Americans 'not understanding' what was going on; the UK was already receiving US aid and the USN was fighting and losing ships and men in the Atlantic before December 1941. However I don't want to impugn the great efforts made by Greece - but nor should you try to belittle what the US did. Actually what i was truying to do was give credits where it belongs.And the greatest gretit for WWII victory belong to the British.

Now as a British patriot as you say you are i didnt understant why you didnt like what i post...

Because of your sneering anti-American post - I'm not the sort of patriot who feels better about his country by seeing his allies being unfairly criticised. Anti-American what???????? :roll:

Is it anti-American to say that they join the war in 1942???