Skip to main content

It is the 1930's. The world is gripped by the Great Depression and militarism, as "great powers" in Asia and Europe turn to military expansion as a solution for their economic troubles. World War Two is not far away. The US sees potential military threats to itself against both coasts from Asia and Europe, and draws up contingency plans for a naval and land war against expansionist empires in both the Atlantic and the Pacific.

But the trans-Atlantic target of "War Plan Red" is not Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.  It is the British Empire.

Until 1917, the US was viewed as a third-rate nation with, admittedly, a growing economy, but no military power to speak of and no influence on world affairs--more or less as we view Indonesia or Brazil today. The US had managed to beat the aging and decrepit Spanish Empire in 1898, and had sent some troops to ineffectually chase Pancho Villa around Mexico in 1916, but it was, in the world of powerful nations, a nobody.

But during the First World War, the US had proven its economic might, and had, in the space of just two years, developed a navy and army that could hold its own against the most powerful nations on earth. By the 1920's, the US was firmly established on the world stage.

In accordance with its new role, America now drew up a number of military contingency plans against a series of potential opponents. These were give color-coded names, with the US itself as "Blue". Although there were many such plans, targeted against countries ranging from Iceland to China, only a handful of them were seriously developed. War Plan Black targeted Germany, and made plans for a re-match of the First World War (this was drawn up even before the Nazi Party came to power). War Plan Orange dealt with Japan, which was rapidly building a huge fleet and becoming a naval rival in the Pacific. War Plan Green was geared towards a war with Mexico, a politically-unstable neighbor which the US had already invaded in 1846 and had sent troops to intervene several times since. War Plan White was a contingency to use the military against domestic uprisings within the US--these plans at first focused on a potential Socialist or Communist revolution, and then in the 1930's added the possibility of a home-grown Nazi uprising.

The most surprising plan, though, at least today, was War Plan Red, which targeted the British Empire. Although the British Empire was the largest in the world, the US was already shouldering aside Great Britain as the world's economic and military superpower--and England, it was assumed, may not go quietly. Throughout its history, Britain had always responded to global challengers to its power by simply crushing them, and US planners prepared for a repeat of that policy. "The war aim of RED in a war with BLUE." the War Plan Red noted, "is conceived to be the definite elimination of BLUE as an important economic and commercial rival."

The US war planners assumed that any war between the US and UK would center around the British possession of Canada. The US Army prepared for a land war that would be launched by British forces from Canada (code named Crimson) to try to seize strategic American locations like Detroit and Buffalo and then move on to New York and Washington DC. The US Navy planned for a potential British amphibious assault across the Atlantic, with invasion landings in New Jersey and Delaware, and also for a US blockade of Canadian ports on both coasts, to prevent British troops and supplies from reaching Canada. The US aims in War Plan Red were to prevent an invasion of the US by invading Canada. Once conquered, Canada was to be incorporated into the US: "Blue intentions are to hold in perpetuity all CRIMSON and RED territory gained . . . The policy will be to prepare the provinces and territories of CRIMSON and RED to become states and territories of the BLUE union upon the declaration of peace."

The US thrust into Canada was to have three prongs. In the west, US forces would invade British Colombia and seize Vancouver, cutting off Canada from all of the British possessions in Asia. In the center, American troops from North Dakota would seize Winnipeg, and US Navy forces would seize all the Canadian territories around the Great Lakes, cutting Canada in two and controlling its industrial centers. And in the east, US forces from New York would capture the port of Halifax and the Maritime Provinces, cutting Canada off from Britain. All of these American attacks would be supported by massive planned air raids on Canadian cities using mustard gas. If the war with England still continued after Canada was successfully conquered, a US Navy thrust would then seize the British island possessions in the Caribbean, and trans-Pacific operations would take control over the British possessions in Southeast Asia.

In 1935, the US began building a series of army bases and airfields along the US-Canada border, put there to help carry out War Plan Red. Many of them are still there, including Fort Drum, in upstate New York. In the 1930's, Fort Drum was the site of large American war games which practiced implementation of War Plan Red. (Today, it is used by the US as a training area for Arctic and mountain warfare.) And in the early 1930's, famed aviator Charles Lindbergh was instructed by the US government to photograph Canadian beaches and airfields in Hudson Bay, as part of the intelligence-gathering for the potential invasion of Canada.

In the end, of course, the US ended up fighting Hitler and Mussolini instead of the British Empire, and England today is the US's staunchest ally (though the Canadians still think the US is a little nutty).

War Plan Red was declassified in 1974 (though parts of it, including three secret US airfields on the Canadian border, had accidentally been revealed in 1935). At about the same time, moreover, it was revealed that Canada too had its own contingency plans for war with the US, drawn up in 1921, code-named "Defense Scheme Number One". It called for Canadian forces to mount a "forward defense" by actively invading the US at the first signs of American aggression, targeting Albany, Minneapolis, Great Falls and Seattle, to occupy as much US territory as possible and hold out until British aid could arrive across the Atlantic.

 

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Fascinating! (6+ / 0-)

    Invading Canada...who knew? Thanks for posting.

    Ho'oponopono. To make things right; restore harmony; heal.

    by earicicle on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:04:10 PM PDT

  •  Fascinating read... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, Railfan, blueyedace2, kurt, ER Doc

    But do ya have a link?

    "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." - 17th-century French clergyman and statesman Cardinal Richelieu.

    by markthshark on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:14:54 PM PDT

    •  link to 1935 version here: (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      markthshark, blueyedace2, kurt, ER Doc

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:24:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        blueyedace2, Lenny Flank, ER Doc

        I can't believe this has mostly gone unseen for forty years. Any scenario involving one of these plans would really have been an epochal life-changing event for the entire world.

        "If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged." - 17th-century French clergyman and statesman Cardinal Richelieu.

        by markthshark on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:28:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It Really Hasn't (0+ / 0-)

          There's a company which produces commercial military simulations which has had several naval games out dealing with these hypothetical wars for at least the last decade.  If one looks up "Avalanche Press," you'll find they're still producing them.  In addtion to the CRIMSON plan against Canada and the RED plan for dealing with Britain, the US also had GOLD for engaging the French, BLACK for fighting the Germans and ORANGE for dealing with the Japanese.  Ultimately they lumped all of the plans under the RAINBOW cover for comprehensive plans to deal with threats from every direction.

          Incidentally, the Washington naval negotiations were driven by the antagonism between the US and Britain and the latter's recognition that if it tried to maintain a fleet sized to its historical limits it would bankrupt the Empire in short order.  American politicians wanted off the treadmill too.  Everybody but the Japanese thought it was a good idea, at least for the time being.  

          "Love the Truth, defend the Truth, speak the Truth, and hear the Truth" - Jan Hus, d.1415 CE

          by PrahaPartizan on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 10:03:34 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Wikipedia (or should that be Wikipaedia?): (5+ / 0-)
  •  Saw that on YouTube the other day. (4+ / 0-)

    Fascinating really the path not taken. We'd be a different country if Canada were a part of the United States, and you have to wonder whether a freshly defeated Britain would have been able to hold out against the Nazi war machine.

    Or whether a victorious Britain might not just have annexed us back into the Empire.

    Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

    by MBNYC on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:19:59 PM PDT

  •  ya just can't trust anybody (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    blueyedace2, Lenny Flank

    apparently.

    This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

    by Karl Rover on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:20:38 PM PDT

  •  It shouldn't have surprised anyone (13+ / 0-)

    Part of the training and work in professional military staffs is to draw up plans for various contingencies, even absurd ones, and once you have them, it doesn't cost anything to shove them in a drawer for the highly unlikely event they'd ever be needed. In fact, the absurd ones are actually good for training because it forces the planners to think outside the box. For instance the war plans against Japan would by necessity have involved a heavy emphasis on naval power and later air power. A war against Germany, again primarily you have the Atlantic to deal with, going both ways. A war with Canada would have involved primarily land forces operating over infrastructure designed to simplify transport going both ways.

    It's for the same reason that I have no doubt, official statements to the contrary, that in some drawer somewhere are plans labeled "Alien Contact (Peaceful)", "Alien Contact (Potentially Hostile)", "Alien Contact (Invasion)" and so on and so forth.

    •  I echo your sentiments. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lenny Flank, Calamity Jean, ER Doc

      As bizarre as it sounds, I'm sure we have multiple plans on hand for alien contact.  I believe the French publicly acknowledged that they do.

      FWIW:  the over all war plan for the US strategy in WWII was War Plan Rainbow

      This space for rent -- Cheap!

      by jds1978 on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 02:58:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Even unofficial ones (5+ / 0-)

        When Max Brooks was doing research for the book World War Z one of the amusing things he discovered that just about everyone he talked to, cops or military, had at least once thought about what they'd have to do in a Zombie Apocalypse.

        When I was in the military as an officer-to-be, I remember multiple evenings in the mess having long, detailed discussions (over beers) about what sort of things should be done in the event, say, of an invasion by the Empire's stormtroopers.  (Conclusion: they couldn't hit the broadside of the barn and had shit all for indirect fire support, so artillery was the way to go.)

        As I said, it's part of good training, teaching people to be flexible in dealing with an unknown situation. After you've completed an exercise where the scenario is your base is being invaded by ghosts, suddenly dealing with human infiltrators doesn't seem quite as challenging.

    •  According to ex Canadian defense minister, the (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lenny Flank, RiveroftheWest

      aliens are already here:

      https://www.youtube.com/...

    •  and the think-tanks do as well. (4+ / 0-)

      Why do the nasty neocons, and the religious right, et. al., always seem to be so well-prepared for every contingency?  For example where did the PATRIOT Act come from?  Why did the Bush Admin jump to foregone conclusions about Iraq?

      Because right-winger think tanks had blue-skied every possible contingency under the sun that would enable them to exercise power and gain power.  Then when trigger events occurred or opportunities presented themselves, all that was necessary was to pull a pre-existing plan down from the shelves, fine-tune it a bit to match up with the circumstances, and follow the plan.

      Between the occasional big press releases e.g. "Heritage Foundation comes up with Big Analysis and Big Plan!", what are those think tanks doing?  They're war-gaming every possible contingency and drawing up their plans.

      Same way as the Pentagon quite legitimately draws up plans for every possible contingency that involves a potential deployment or engagement of American forces.

      Our side fails by not doing this.   We need a think tank of our own, with a bunch of full-time salaried people who include subject-matter experts, blue-sky daydreamers, and wild visionaries, whose job is to brainstorm every possible contingency that affects our agenda.  Elections, legislation, litigation, and mass action strategies, tactics, engagements, outcomes, possible futures, etc. etc., all of it.  No holds barred, no scenario too way-out.

      And then we need to make plans and put them on the proverbial shelf, all linked through a comprehensive index.  Thus whenever any circumstance, event, or opportunity presents itself, our candidates, elected officials, and attorneys can pull down the relevant docs, fine-tune them to the specific conditions, and put them into action.

      We need our own version of the Heritage Foundation and ALEC.  Moaning about the righties having those things does not help us win.  We need to have those things ourselves, and that will help us win.

      We got the future back. Uh-oh.

      by G2geek on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 01:18:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  to be fair, the PATRIOT Act came from (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        G2geek

        Bill Clinton. Nearly all of the PATRIOT Act consists of parts of Bill Clinton's earlier "Anti-Terrorism Bills" that failed to pass in 1995 or 1996. And nearly everything the Dubya-ites did----holding people without trial, kidnapping people and sending them somewhere to be tortured, spying on our own citizens--was already being done by the Clinton-ites.

        In the end, reality always wins.

        by Lenny Flank on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 04:54:13 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  oopsie, my mistake. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lenny Flank, RiveroftheWest

          One has to wonder how things would have gone with Gore in the WH.

          For one thing, the headlines on 9/11 would have been "Terrorist plot busted!" and nobody would have believed that AQ planned to fly 'em into buildings.  In particular the right wing would probably have thought it was Gore's fictitious cover story for one thing or another.  But the entire course of history would have been different.

          This because Gore was cozy with the USIC, per his opposition to civvie crypto: he would have taken the CIA red alerts seriously, and in that climate, the FBI field agent's alerts on the "flying lessons" guys would have been heeded.

          Those contingency plans would not have been needed.

          The place where I draw an absolute line is torture.  Certain things are bad but permissible in emergencies, but certain things are absolutely evil in a moral sense and not permissible under any circumstances.  Aside from which, all of our previous experience back at least to WW2 (USMC ITTs) demonstrated that torture does not work.  So the principles + the pragmatics are convergent, and the result "should" be a no-brainer.

          I'm not one of those who freak out about NSA.  NSA is only looking for natsec threats, not for union organizers or domestic dissidents (why they needed to collect on Merkel remains to be seen but I'm inclined to think it was connected to something legit).  If they have to "look" in order to ascertain what's what, that's acceptable under the circumstances.  (I'm also a ferocious supporter of EFF, four figures' worth per year, but friends can agree to disagree about certain things.)

          Anyway, the truly interesting thing here is that the roots of the financial catastrophe (Greenspan the Randian) also go back to the Clinton years.  So we can also ask, if Gore was in, would the financial catastrophe have occurred? or would Gore have managed things per Clinton + continuity, not taking the risks that Bush took?

          With the 9/11 guys arrested and the attack not occurring, I'm inclined to think that the economy would not have crashed either.  We would not have had the post-9/11 recession, thus no need for the Bush Admin stimulus programs, thus no housing bubble with deregulated financial institutions, thus no housing crash in 2008, thus no everything-else-crash in 2008, thus no depression that followed.  

          In a very real way, the Supreme Court changed the entire course of US history for the worse when they decided Bush v. Gore.  They set us on a path that led to war, economic depression, damage to our military, damage to our culture, the whole nine yards.  It will probably take a generation to undo the damage and clean up after all of it.  

          We got the future back. Uh-oh.

          by G2geek on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 06:51:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Well, after the Trent Affair, the British DID... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, Bluefin, ER Doc

    have their own concrete plans for Kicking ass and chewing bubble gum

    Though in truth the advent of steam power had changed the game against the British Empire's once-insurmountable navy..


    The Royal Navy retained the appearance of maritime supremacy principally because it existed in a naval vacuum, with no serious rivals except for halfhearted and sporadic challenges by the French. At that, the British Navy would have had a difficult time making itself felt on the North American coast. The coming of steam power had destroyed the ability of its best warships to cruise indefinitely in American waters as the blockading squadrons had done in 1812. Even with a major base at Halifax, or possible aid from Confederate ports, the British Navy would have found it a precarious venture to try to keep station on the U.S. Coast. No steam navy operated with success against any reasonably formidable enemy at the distances from its home ports that a trans-Atlantic war would have imposed on the British fleet until the U.S. Navy fought the Japanese in World War II.
    I cannot help but think what happens the moment aircraft carriers are proven obsolete in a future war, for reason that drones can potentially be launched in insane numbers from ground bases. Oh, and cruise missiles.
  •  tomorrow's history diary: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    katiec, MRA NY, ER Doc

    The 1877 "Great Strike" and the Reading Massacre

    Stay tuned.  :)

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 04:13:29 PM PDT

  •  Canada's ex Defense Minister on the aliens (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank
  •  Invading Delaware! In the 1930s there was (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, ER Doc

    Nothing there but skeeters.

    Thump! Bang. Whack-boing. It's dub!

    by dadadata on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 05:14:18 PM PDT

  •  Mustard gas-frightening... n/t (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, Calamity Jean, ER Doc, Joffan

    Float like a manhole cover, sting like a sash weight! Clean Coal Is A Clinker!

    by JeffW on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 05:55:37 PM PDT

  •  Countries don't have friends, they have interests. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, Bluefin, ER Doc

    I believe it was Henry Kissinger who said this.

    If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally sharp, he can barrel that baby in so low... oh you oughta see it sometime. It's a sight. A big plane like a '52... varrrooom! Its jet exhaust... frying chickens in the barnyard!

    by Major Kong on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 05:57:31 PM PDT

  •  Going for Seattle? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank

    In the 20's and 30's there was exactly one two-lane highway connecting Vancouver and Seattle, one one-track railroad line, and a large body of water.

    Considering that both the highway and the railway could have been completely blocked with only a few sticks of dynamite, that left the Strait of Georgia and the San Juan Islands as the invasion route.

    Snicker. Bremerton, just across from Seattle, is still a naval base, was then too. Our fleet in that era was not all that big compared to the Royal Navy, but it dwarfed the Canadian Navy. The phrase "turkey shoot" comes to mind.

    Throw in about 30 or 40 thousand pissed-off deer hunters from across the Puget Sound area, and the Canadians may never have made it past Whatcom County if they had really pressed a land invasion.

    Fascinating read, Lenny, thank you!

    And yeah, I know tarantulas don't really act like that at all, so no snarking, this is the internet damnit!

    by itzadryheat on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 06:55:43 PM PDT

    •  Might want to start reading some history, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lenny Flank, ER Doc, RiveroftheWest

      In 1930, there were 179,000 people living in the greater Seattle area, and the population of Washington State was 1.3 million.

      BC had a population of 676,000.

      Probably would have had a hard time scraping up any significant number of "pissed off deer hunters".

      Might also want to read some Canadian Military history, during both WWI and WWII, Canadian Military formations were The Western Allies "Stormtroopers", starting with the Second Battle of Ypres.

      That was the reason for Plan Red's use of mustard gas and Lewisite against city centres, as it was believed that given The Canadian Army's history , that it was of no use against Canadian Soldiers.

      From the 1920's to the start of WWII, the sticking point of both the Plan Red and Defence Scheme 1, in the short term, would have been Naval Warfare in the Atlantic, which until 1940, would have been a 50:50 proposition, and possible alliances.

      The sticking point in the long term, would have been the demonstrated inability for modern economies to win a war against even a partial equal, with out years of grinding attrition, as at the time, even the Germans did not have The Blitzkrieg, and neither Canada or the US were nations that could have been "Blitzed".

      Grinding warfare was the rule, until the advent of nukes, and until the Manhattan Project, both British and Canadian nuclear and nuclear weapons research was far more advanced than the US's.

      •  I'm well aware of CDN military history. (0+ / 0-)

        Yes, by all accounts, the Canadians were incredible fighters in both wars, while we lagged, given our later entry in both. I do know a good bit of the history, albeit only in a general way rather than exact detail about every Canadian action on the front.

        I was born in the path of this invasion, in Bellingham. Virtually every man of my grandparent's generation hunted, some far more than others, but every male on both sides of my family knew how shoot a rifle. Many of the local men were vets from the first world war too, so not all of them were completely without experience in modern combat. Incredulity would have ruled the day, but after that a partisan front would probably have formed.

        I perhaps exaggerated a bit on the numbers, but with there being no troops at Camp Lewis from 1919 to 1936, any early US Army participation was moot. National Guardsmen would have played a role, but I suspect that there would have been a callout for volunteers, since any large number of troops (from any other state) were days away by train. Much like the Paris taxis of the Marne, the few highways back then could have accommodated volunteer cars and trucks, although not without good traffic control (as is still the case with Seattle traffic!).

        Any Canadian buildup would have been very noticeable. With no large military installations in the Vancouver area then or now, the invasion force would have had to have been put up more or less in the open somewhere, where public observation would have been easy. It would not have been secret for very long.

        The Canadian Navy had, and still has, Esquimalt Harbor, just west of Victoria. It is easily the largest Canadian military base in all of British Columbia. I've been in the harbor: it was very easy to defend by early 20th century standards, but by the 30's easy to bottle up with large surface combatants from the Pacific Fleet.

        A stand-off would have occurred eventually, but where? My guess would be on having the lines somewhere between the Everett area and the Skagit Valley. With few roads and a sometimes difficult geography, advancements in either direction would have been hard.

        Thank goodness neither of our nations were actually that lunatic.

        And yeah, I know tarantulas don't really act like that at all, so no snarking, this is the internet damnit!

        by itzadryheat on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 07:57:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  At the time, there were (0+ / 0-)

          5 Regiments in The Greater Vancouver area, 3 on the Island, two in the Interior, (Kamloops and Vernon) and one in the BC Rocky Mountains.

          All were at Reserve Status, (one Active Standing Company, 3 reserve Companies). All had WWI Veterans at their core.

          The plan was to mobilize the Reserve Companies, which could be done in two days, drive south to the railheads, mostly by train, (the road system on both sides of the border was garbage, but worse in BC, and neither Military was very Mechinized in the NorthWest),

          Seize the railheads, entrench and fortify, and hang on until relieved by the Brits.

          The RCN and British Navy's role was to close the Strait of Georgia and neutralize any US Naval vessels in the Gulf, and destroy the shipyards in Seattle and Bremerton. At the time, there was not much of a US Naval presence in the Gulf, most of the Pacific USN was either abroad, or in SF and San Diego.

          With most of Canada's population and cities clustered along the 49, the plan was to try to do "defence in depth", on the US side of the border.

          Triggers for the attack would have been a US mobilization or a significant level of political and economic threats.

          We are very lucky that nobody was stupid enough, as the War would have, given the technology of the time, devastated much of the US and Canada, and would have created a completely different political world going forward.

          •  Thank you, Jay, this is good stuff. (0+ / 0-)

            I shall bow to your greater knowledge!

            It would certainly have been nasty for both sides. I can see a lot of soldiers on both sides not being happy with fighting former allies, so how hard they would have fought is questionable if the political situation was ambivalent at best.

            And yeah, I know tarantulas don't really act like that at all, so no snarking, this is the internet damnit!

            by itzadryheat on Fri Jun 06, 2014 at 01:35:29 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  England vs US (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, ER Doc

    1930 figures

    US-  122.7 million people (15th United States Census, 1930.)

    UK---around 52 million; England 39 million.  (unattributed source)

    Canada-- around 10 million people  (about what we have now in Los Angeles County).  (wiki)

    “Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects.” ― Will Rogers

    by MugWumpBlues on Wed Jun 04, 2014 at 10:22:39 PM PDT

    •  Have to compare, (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Lenny Flank, ER Doc, RiveroftheWest

      British Empire vs US, not Britain and Canada against the US,

      As the British Empire at the time was a defacto Globe Spanning alliance.

      So, in alt-history it would be British Naval assets with Indians, Ghurka's , Kiwi's and Aussies pulling off a Pearl Harbour during the toddler days of Naval Aviation.

      With maybe the French, Spanish and Japanese allied against the US.

      •  Alt history (0+ / 0-)

        Well, I thought about adding in the other members of the British Empire.  I was sort of curious of the numbers (and a little lazy before adding the other #'s in for Australia and New Zealand).  

        But just to tongue in cheek argue alt history, if one adds in the British allies, then we (the US) should be able to count on allies like Texas, Ireland and Germany, and maybe even France, Scotland and China.  

        Dont know if anyone saw the (once) famous Bill Mauldin cartoon from WWII.  "You limeys would have already lost the war without allies like Ireland and Texas."

        “Everyone is ignorant, only on different subjects.” ― Will Rogers

        by MugWumpBlues on Fri Jun 06, 2014 at 07:00:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Oh, I always thought it the enemy was (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank

    the Canadians. I watched that documentary from the late '60's...The President's Analyst!

    Poverty is not an accident. Like slavery and apartheid, it is man-made and can be removed by the actions of human beings. —Nelson Mandela

    by kaliope on Thu Jun 05, 2014 at 03:27:02 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site