A 1935 US Plan for Invasion of Canada

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

We would probably try to go neutral, if it were possible.

The British would probably be happy with that. The only question is whether the US would stand for it.

I don't see why we would mind. It's not like you guys would provide us with anything we really needed to fight the Brits, after all.

Operating bases half as far from your target and an auto industry almost as big as that of the US.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
Things would've changed pretty dramatically in order to bring about a UK-US war. The scenario is so far fetched it's really impossible to say what role Canada would play, if any.

-Arrian, feeling an inexplicable need to state the obvious

scenario - UK, frightened at the same time by raising Germany and USSR, seeing the isolationist US as an unreliable ally, disgusted with Chiangs govt in China, needing peace in the Pacific (so the RN can focus on Germany and Italy), and needing a threat to the Soviet Far East, decides to renew its alliance with Japan. US - UK relations grow very bad. Japan and US get into friction over something, resulting in war, which somehow gets UK involved.

That would be a war involving Japan as well though. I agree its hard to get strictly a US - UK war that doesnt also involve Japan, and probably others as well, without a much earlier POD than 1935.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Operating bases half as far from your target and an auto industry almost as big as that of the US.

In OTL the Canadian auto industry managed to support the war industry for two years, despite integration with the auto industry in neutral US. Why couldnt the US auto industry function just as well integrated with a neutral Canadian industry?

[Arrian]

I was talking about a future scenario, following Spec's post that Canada likely wouldn't ally with the UK now.

-Arrian

[KrazyHorse]

Actually, we were discussing today.

In 1935 it was much more likely. The UK could still pretend to be in the same league as the US at that point.

[lord of the mark]

yup.

see post #17

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


In OTL the Canadian auto industry managed to support the war industry for two years, despite integration with the auto industry in neutral US. Why couldnt the US auto industry function just as well integrated with a neutral Canadian industry?

a) The auto industry in 1939 was not even close to as integrated as today.

b) I'm not sure that there were no problems due to the neutral status of the US

c) Cash and carry and lend-lease were not truly neutral positions

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Actually, we were discussing today.

In 1935 it was much more likely. The UK could still pretend to be in the same league as the US at that point.

If it was UK plus the entire commonwealth/empire allied with Japan, (lets handwave and keep everyone else neutral) id say the US would have its hands pretty full, esp at the beginning. I guess US GDP is still a lot bigger, but the opening naval balance favours UK/Comm/Japan, by a good bit.

[Drake Tungsten]

Operating bases half as far from your target and an auto industry almost as big as that of the US.

I still don't think the bases are close enough that we wouldn't have to use in-flight refueling. And we're not going to need your auto-industry; the war isn't going to last that long.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


a) The auto industry in 1939 was not even close to as integrated as today.

b) I'm not sure that there were no problems due to the neutral status of the US

c) Cash and carry and lend-lease were not truly neutral positions

a. the global auto industry wasnt. I thought the North American auto industry (IE Michigan-Lower Ontario) was quite integrated. I could be wrong.

b. I dont know

c. True, but that wasnt really in place till after June 1940.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Operating bases half as far from your target and an auto industry almost as big as that of the US.

I still don't think the bases are close enough that we wouldn't have to use in-flight refueling. And we're not going to need your auto-industry; the war isn't going to last that long.

I think the bombers might be able to make it. If not, Newf provides a good place to get to Iceland from.

And given that you haven't fought a large industrialised country in 60 years I think it's a bit presumptuous to assume that an invasion of the UK would be a cakewalk.

You're not talking Iraq here. You're talking a country with a couple of hundred thousand troops, who are just as good as yours on a one-to-one basis, a real air defense system etc.

Transport is going to be a problem. The RAF can't hold the skies, but it will make things rough on troopships or planes.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


a. the global auto industry wasnt. I thought the North American auto industry (IE Michigan-Lower Ontario) was quite integrated. I could be wrong.

There was integration. There was not the same level as today. Car parts nowadays cross the border a half dozen times before they roll off as finished product.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Sorry to disappoint, but it wouldnt have been about YOU, it would have been about larger US vs UK issues, esp in the Pacific. In the unlikely event of a US-UK war, the US had to consider the likelihood that Canada would stand with the UK, and launch a "preemptive" strike. Thats one of the reasons Canadian PMs of the era (Borden, at the Paris conf) were so intent on smoothing over US-UK disputes.

Well considring the OP gives credit to the Canadians for burning the WH when in fact it was the British, one would conclude that Spec is still in fact a UK toady rather than a 'proud' canadian.

[KrazyHorse]

Well considring the OP gives credit to the Canadians for burning the WH when in fact it was the British

Some Brits, some Canadian militia.

[lord of the mark]

note the warplan cited seems quite aware of this.

much of it focus is on the need to capture Halifax, and the St. Lawrence ports, to prevent "Red" from using the former to attack US shipping, and the latter to make contact with "Crimson". It seems to take for granted that Red will dominate the North Atlantic, at least to maintain sea lanes to Halifax. Presumably enough to close sea lanes from Blue to the old world. Control of Halifax gives Red the ability to interdict shipping between Blue and Latin America, and even Blues coastal shipping. And ultimately to launch raids against Blues coast, directly attacking Blues war making ability. Blues army has the advantage, and needs to act quickly to support an overstretched Blue Navy, which now has to deal with Red, Crimson, and Orange fleets.

note im discussing 1935, not 2006. I can come up with a wildly improbable, but not flat out impossible scen for 1935. Cant do that for 2006 - like somebody said, whatever you change to make it possible (Islamist UK?Fascist US?) will affect alliances, etc.