The United States conquers the world after WW2

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#16

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Feb 2021, 02:46

AnchorSteam wrote:
09 Feb 2021, 22:27

An oh men, if you think we lack the troops to occupy the world, where the hell do you think we can find trained administrators to run a Colonial Empire?!?
The US didn't have one!
Cuba had already been cut loose, Puerto Rico practically runs itself, and as for the Philippines the only significant American "boss" present was MacArthur. HIS job was to help build an Army of 10 Philippine Divisions so that the US could withdraw it's men... which amounted to a couple of Regiments at the start of the war.

Conquest would have been easy, building a successful Administration that was capable of getting the whole world back on it's feet after a war like that would have been practically impossible.
We just didn't have half a million experts in that feild available.
There would be no need for the US to garrison every country on the planet. All the US needs to do is:

(1) Eliminate any rival power (e.g., the Soviet Union), and
(2) Set up a network of military bases from which it can strike anywhere on the planet.

With these two objectives met, the U.S. can simply bomb and destroy any armaments factories that crop up anywhere in the world. This means the United States would be the only country in the world with military planes, warships, tanks, artillery, etc. The U.S. Navy would dominate global trade and make sure that all trade were made on terms favorable to America. Countries that don't comply can simply be blockaded and their armaments industries destroyed.

Edit: typo
Last edited by historygeek2021 on 10 Feb 2021, 02:52, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#17

Post by AnchorSteam » 10 Feb 2021, 02:50

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:46
There would be no need for the US to garrison every country on the planet. All the US needs to do is:

(1) Eliminate any rival power (e.g., the Soviet Union), and
(2) Set up a network of military bases from which it can strike anywhere on the planet.

With these two objective met, the U.S. can simply bomb and destroy any armaments factories that crop up anywhere in the world. This means the United States would be the only country in the world with military planes, warships, tanks, artillery, etc. The U.S. Navy would dominate global trade and make sure that all trade were made on terms favorable to America. Countries that don't comply can simply be blockaded and their armaments industries destroyed.
....

So if the US had a Govt. that was even nastier than the 3rd Reich it could kill anyone it wanted to, eh?

I hope I never live to see that day. In fact, I mean not to.


historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#18

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Feb 2021, 02:52

Thinking more about step 1 on the path to world domination (conquer the USSR), it seems the best way to do it would be to attack from Persia using the Caspian Sea to launch maritime invasions of the Caucasus and Kazakhstan. The United States already had a good logistical setup in Persia because it was a major route for lend-lease supplies to the USSR. The U.S. could then use the Ural River as a supply route up to the last remaining Soviet industrial regions near the Ural Mountains. This invasion route allows the USA to:

(1) Deprive the USSR of its oil in the Caucasus, and
(2) Occupy and destroy the last remaining industrial regions in the Soviet Union.

This invasion route is also over more open terrain than the forests and swamps that the Heer trudged in 1941. Without oil, the Red Army won't have any tanks, planes, trucks or tractors. It will be a foot and horse army that the motorized U.S. Army can run circles around. The U.S. can simply occupy the Caspian and Ural regions and level the USSR's remaining industrial centers with B-29s rather than get bogged down in the forests of northern Russia. Russia would be cut in two, the Asiatic republics would be "liberated" along with most of the Ukraine. It wouldn't even be necessary to leave a large occupying force.
Last edited by historygeek2021 on 10 Feb 2021, 02:58, edited 4 times in total.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#19

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Feb 2021, 02:54

AnchorSteam wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:50


So if the US had a Govt. that was even nastier than the 3rd Reich it could kill anyone it wanted to, eh?

I hope I never live to see that day. In fact, I mean not to.
It could, but that's not what I'm proposing. I'm proposing that the U.S. could have eliminated armaments industries in the rest of the world. There would then never be another country with any appreciable military strength. The United States would have the only well equipped army and the only navy and the only air force. There would be no need to mass produce nuclear weapons. There would be world peace, forever.

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#20

Post by AnchorSteam » 10 Feb 2021, 03:13

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:54
AnchorSteam wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:50


So if the US had a Govt. that was even nastier than the 3rd Reich it could kill anyone it wanted to, eh?

I hope I never live to see that day. In fact, I mean not to.
It could, but that's not what I'm proposing. I'm proposing that the U.S. could have eliminated armaments industries in the rest of the world. There would then never be another country with any appreciable military strength. The United States would have the only well equipped army and the only navy and the only air force. There would be no need to mass produce nuclear weapons. There would be world peace, forever.
Oh, well.... as long as it's all done in the name of "Peace" .... :roll:

This Pax Americana will end eventually, and what then? Post WW2 this was the most popular nation in the world, the only people who really hated us were Communists crankiung out manufactured hate for the sake of gaining power over the world. Back then only a small number of cranks believed them, but look around today... and then try to immagine it being ten times as bad; with full and concrete justification.

Also; you are assuming that we will have no corrupt maniacs in the halls of power, and once again you need to take a look around today to see how likely that is to come to pass.
This also opens the door to Robber-Baron capitalists to roam the world like the Carpet-Baggers of the Reconstruction era. Basically, the entire would would become one big Vietnam. Or, even worse, one big Palestine.

There would also be internal opposition to this, and they would be right to oppose the ongoing destruction of the rest of the world's industrial base. Yes, it would have to be indiscriminate to be effective and because there would be no consequence for over-doing it, remember Clinton blasting an aspirin factory in the Sudan because he couldn't find a better target in time for a Press Conference?

It seems like maddness to me, but I remember what the world was like 30 years ago, before it all started going to hell and people started to lose their minds,

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#21

Post by KDF33 » 10 Feb 2021, 03:42

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:43
The USSR would be conquered. See the original post in this thread.
I've read it. It assumes much.

On V-E day, the U.S. had about 2.5 million ground troops in Europe. The Soviets, about 5.5 million. The U.S. would need the active participation of allied troops - British, Canadian, French - to stand a chance. That participation is, to put it mildly, unlikely.

First, just because Churchill had Operation Unthinkable drafted, that doesn't mean he was determined to actually carry it out. Contingency planning is a thing.

Second, Churchill is in any event losing the July 5 general election. However unlikely British participation to a U.S. war of aggression would be under the wartime coalition, you can be sure that a majority Labour government under Attlee will be against it.

The same applies to France. De Gaulle is Chairman of the Provisional Government until January 1946. He is a nationalist and wants to restore France to its former status as a great power. He is comfortable with "triangulating" between the US and the USSR, as shown by his visit to Moscow in October 1944.

Neither Britain nor France will support such a U.S. adventure. Without their active participation, the U.S. would be foolish to try: alone, its forces wouldn't defeat the Red Army in the heart of Europe.
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:43
France [...]China[...] Britain[...]
The rest is kind of moot, given how the first step is already a dubious proposition.
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:43
No, but they were men. Men who could see the advantages of knocking out the Soviet Union when it was weak. Men who could see the advantages of gaining complete military domination of the planet. Men who could envision a peaceful world ruled by the benevolent United States of America, where war no longer exists, and the United States ensures that justice and democracy are brought to all people on every continent.
Men who were preoccupied with bringing the troops home, restoring normalcy and winning the next electoral cycle. Men who also, unlike the Nazi leadership, were not criminal mass murderers.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#22

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Feb 2021, 04:40

KDF33 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 03:42

On V-E day, the U.S. had about 2.5 million ground troops in Europe. The Soviets, about 5.5 million. The U.S. would need the active participation of allied troops - British, Canadian, French - to stand a chance. That participation is, to put it mildly, unlikely.

First, just because Churchill had Operation Unthinkable drafted, that doesn't mean he was determined to actually carry it out. Contingency planning is a thing.

Second, Churchill is in any event losing the July 5 general election. However unlikely British participation to a U.S. war of aggression would be under the wartime coalition, you can be sure that a majority Labour government under Attlee will be against it.

The same applies to France. De Gaulle is Chairman of the Provisional Government until January 1946. He is a nationalist and wants to restore France to its former status as a great power. He is comfortable with "triangulating" between the US and the USSR, as shown by his visit to Moscow in October 1944.

Neither Britain nor France will support such a U.S. adventure. Without their active participation, the U.S. would be foolish to try: alone, its forces wouldn't defeat the Red Army in the heart of Europe.

The situation in continental Europe doesn't actually matter. See my comment above about invading from Persia. It would actually be to America's advantage to lose in continental Europe. During the retreat, American troops could demolish every factory in Western Europe to keep them falling into the hands of the communists. What was left of European industry would be completely destroyed while American troops blitzed up the Caspian to the Urals. And De Gaulle and Attlee wouldn't have a say in the matter. The U.S. could provoke a war with the Soviets on its own, and their countries would be the ones to pay the price.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#23

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Feb 2021, 04:46

AnchorSteam wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 03:13
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:54
AnchorSteam wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 02:50


So if the US had a Govt. that was even nastier than the 3rd Reich it could kill anyone it wanted to, eh?

I hope I never live to see that day. In fact, I mean not to.
It could, but that's not what I'm proposing. I'm proposing that the U.S. could have eliminated armaments industries in the rest of the world. There would then never be another country with any appreciable military strength. The United States would have the only well equipped army and the only navy and the only air force. There would be no need to mass produce nuclear weapons. There would be world peace, forever.
Oh, well.... as long as it's all done in the name of "Peace" .... :roll:

This Pax Americana will end eventually, and what then? Post WW2 this was the most popular nation in the world, the only people who really hated us were Communists crankiung out manufactured hate for the sake of gaining power over the world. Back then only a small number of cranks believed them, but look around today... and then try to immagine it being ten times as bad; with full and concrete justification.

Also; you are assuming that we will have no corrupt maniacs in the halls of power, and once again you need to take a look around today to see how likely that is to come to pass.
This also opens the door to Robber-Baron capitalists to roam the world like the Carpet-Baggers of the Reconstruction era. Basically, the entire would would become one big Vietnam. Or, even worse, one big Palestine.

There would also be internal opposition to this, and they would be right to oppose the ongoing destruction of the rest of the world's industrial base. Yes, it would have to be indiscriminate to be effective and because there would be no consequence for over-doing it, remember Clinton blasting an aspirin factory in the Sudan because he couldn't find a better target in time for a Press Conference?

It seems like maddness to me, but I remember what the world was like 30 years ago, before it all started going to hell and people started to lose their minds,
Was it any less cruel to leave Stalin in power and allow the rest of the world to rearm, risking the annihilation of the human race through nuclear Armageddon? Corrupt maniacs have been in power since the end of WW2. They've murdered millions in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen ...

User avatar
AnchorSteam
Member
Posts: 397
Joined: 31 Oct 2020, 06:43
Location: WAY out there

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#24

Post by AnchorSteam » 10 Feb 2021, 05:22

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 04:46
Was it any less cruel to leave Stalin in power and allow the rest of the world to rearm, risking the annihilation of the human race through nuclear Armageddon? Corrupt maniacs have been in power since the end of WW2. They've murdered millions in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen ...
I dunno.... ask God. Better yet, let's all get together and sue him for malpractice.

I just don't see the america I know being willing and able to do all this. The premiere anti-colonial power turning a 180 like that..... in fact, I started a thread about that, and it was erased for being too off-base.
So.... meh, all of a sudden this whole thing is about as appealing as a Chipotle enema

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#25

Post by KDF33 » 10 Feb 2021, 05:27

historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 04:40
The situation in continental Europe doesn't actually matter. See my comment above about invading from Persia.
The U.S. has a few tens of thousands of non-combat troops in the Middle East. It is in no position to invade the Caucasus.

The Soviets have two armies with 11 divisions and 7 brigades in the Transcaucasian Front on 1 May 1945. Elements of these forces (the 4th Army) are already positioned in the north of Iran.
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 04:40
It would actually be to America's advantage to lose in continental Europe.
How? Depending on the outcome of the fighting, the Soviets might even encircle a significant part of the American expeditionary force.
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 04:40
During the retreat, American troops could demolish every factory in Western Europe to keep them falling into the hands of the communists. What was left of European industry would be completely destroyed
Amazing. Now you've accomplished the feat of making U.S. hegemony seem worse than its Soviet alternative.
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 04:40
while American troops blitzed up the Caspian to the Urals.
With what forces?
historygeek2021 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 04:40
And De Gaulle and Attlee wouldn't have a say in the matter. The U.S. could provoke a war with the Soviets on its own, and their countries would be the ones to pay the price.
On the contrary, the U.S. LOCs would be completely at the mercy of the British and, to a more limited extent, the French. They would have an effective veto over whether or not the 2.5 million U.S. troops in Europe receive supplies.

historygeek2021
Member
Posts: 641
Joined: 17 Dec 2020, 07:23
Location: Australia

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#26

Post by historygeek2021 » 10 Feb 2021, 05:46

Read the thread man. This ATL posits that the U.S. starts planning for war with the USSR in 1942 and doesn't limit itself to 90 divisions as in the OTL. The U.S. could prepare for years in advance to invade from Persia.

Britain and France aren't going to cut off supplies to the only army standing between them and Stalin. America can unilaterally provoke war with the USSR without letting the Europeans know in advance. At that point they certainly aren't going to cut off supplies (not that they could anyway, since the U.S. effectively occupied both their countries).

The Soviets were at the end of their supply lines and their only sources of oil would be obliterated by B-29s on day one. U.S. forces in Europe can plan their retreat before the war even starts. The U.S. Army can retreat as much or as little as it wants. Even if the U.S. Army withdraws to England, the Soviets will end up occupying a desolate continent with an army that relies on horses for transport. America can do whatever it wants from that point.

Edit: phrasing
Last edited by historygeek2021 on 10 Feb 2021, 05:51, edited 2 times in total.

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6350
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#27

Post by Richard Anderson » 10 Feb 2021, 05:48

I think I can honestly say that AHF, after so many years, has finally jumped the shark.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#28

Post by KDF33 » 10 Feb 2021, 05:54

Richard Anderson wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 05:48
I think I can honestly say that AHF, after so many years, has finally jumped the shark.
Agreed. Did you read this gem?

They're not sending their best...

Richard Anderson
Member
Posts: 6350
Joined: 01 Jan 2016, 22:21
Location: Bremerton, Washington

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#29

Post by Richard Anderson » 10 Feb 2021, 05:57

KDF33 wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 05:54
Richard Anderson wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 05:48
I think I can honestly say that AHF, after so many years, has finally jumped the shark.
Agreed. Did you read this gem?

They're not sending their best...
You mean ACG? Yeah, figured that out a while ago.
Richard C. Anderson Jr.

American Thunder: U.S. Army Tank Design, Development, and Doctrine in World War II
Cracking Hitler's Atlantic Wall
Hitler's Last Gamble
Artillery Hell

KDF33
Member
Posts: 1282
Joined: 17 Nov 2012, 02:16

Re: The United States conquers the world after WW2

#30

Post by KDF33 » 10 Feb 2021, 06:03

Richard Anderson wrote:
10 Feb 2021, 05:57
You mean ACG? Yeah, figured that out a while ago.
You're right! Given how ACG ended up, that's not encouraging...

Locked

Return to “What if”