Thread: Britain attacks the US in 1917

Britain lose and ends like AH Empire - many new countries appear on the territory of the former Empire.

I could see this outcome largely eliminating the historically problematic British map redrawing of Europe and the Middle East. Perhaps a more equitable outcome for Germany too, perhaps avoiding some of the conditions that led to WWII there. I am afraid it would be very hard on Britain, and it could place Japan in a much stronger position in the Pacific. It would be a very different world...

I voted for option 3 because i cant see UK successfully invading CONUS or the Americans signing a early armistice.
IMO the British keep Canada first and foremost.

2 and 4 are the most likely depending on how the fates cast the dice.

I was reading the other thread on this with great interest and came away with 3 being the most likely option.

Celine Dion is borned an American citizen ... and that is somehow so comforting.

Definitely number 3; the US, at this point, does NOT have the capability of dictating terms to the British Empire, even with German help, but there's no way Britain could enforce her will on an "enemy" on the far side of the Atlantic, even assuming Canada would be willing to help out. It would result in a temporary stalemate until the US could build her Navy up to the point where she could deny Britain use of the High Seas (probably at least 1920 or so).

I'm not sure.

If her objective is 2, then she obtains1.

If her objective is the subjugation of the US, then I think we can rule that out.
2,3 & 4 seem possible.

But given the 1917 timeline, it's quite possible that Germany will collapse anyhow. It's finances & food are in a bad way, the U.S just has obtained a huge chunk of bad debt and needs to loan again.

So it puts it down to 2 & 3 for me. But it won't be Britain forcing an armistice, it will be the condition of Germany that will be the fait accompli to the USA. So I would lean towards Britain retaining most of her empire (germany not getting squat) and the U.S unwilling to fight as if it were a Dominion to keep Germany in a war... Which still is a loss for the British - but may influence the Kaiser to cease hostilities given the checkmate status of Britain and his own woes.

I voted for option 3 - in the course of my research, I have come to the conclusion it is the most likely outcome.

"Britain gains their objectives and wins the war." Could we define the British objectives? Seems to me that British objectives, as discussed in the previous thread, are more or less enshrined in option 2; the armistace etc.

I think option 2 is meant to be status quo antebellum, with option 1 being the historical outcome of the war.

Still not sure what 'British objectives' are if not status quo antebellum.

Originally Posted by snapper

Still not sure what 'British objectives' are if not status quo antebellum.

The neutralization of rising German naval power.

As shown most starkly by the Washington Naval Treaty (in which the British agreed to a 1:1 ratio with the US, where US programs would have the USN as the superior fleet), Britain's ability to maintain naval dominance was seriously under threat at this time.

In that case a British/US naval confrontation in 1917 would have resulted in a British victory, simple. Can't see that an ealier victory over the USN by the British fleet would alter the naval balance significantly in Germanys favour later.