A "what if" born from boredom

[Sionnach Glic]

Let's imagine that the USA never actualy formed. Instead, each state in the modern US became its own country. How would world history have gone? Which states would rise to dominance, and which would fall? Would we ever see a world war type event in North America?

[Teaos]

Really hard to say, California nowadays is the most powerful over all but would it of been able to rise to power with out the others?

Would the "civil war" still have happened and what would have happened?

I cant see all 50 states surviving. They would have to merg in several super states.

There over all power would be no where near as high and they would lose international standing since they would have internal fighting a lot more.

Would Mexico have taken Texas in the war back in the 1800's? Probably with out the support of the other states.

[sunnyside]

Without forming into a country "manifest destiny" would have been a lot harder. We'd probably have Native American Nations.

Otherwise probably a whole lot like a second Europe. Though maybe less fighting. Also the question for you Europeans would probably be if you'd be conquered by Germany or Russia.

[Graham Kennedy]

No civil war since there would be no need for any secession movement. The southern states would have retained slavery for much longer I guess. I've read that slavery isn't really economically feasible for agricultural workers; it's cheaper to hire workers for the planting and growing seasons than it is to support slaves all year round. So I suppose the institution would have collapsed or faded out in time, but I imagine it would have endured a lot longer, and the legacy of racist "back of the bus" type laws might have lasted much longer - even into the present day.

On the world stage... with no America, Japan gains control of the pacific without World War II reaching into that arena. Germany still fails to cross the channel, I think, so the UK remains independent, just about. Russia did more to win the war in Europe than anybody else, so I imagine that the end result of that arena would have been Russia sweeping right through Europe and the subsequent USSR stretching right through to the French coast, right down to Italy and Spain.

Britain would retain its independence, for a while; Russia hasn't got much of a navy so they have a tougher time crossing the channel than Germany would.

No Manhattan project, so no nukes during WW2. But nukes were an idea whose time has come, the science was already around, and now Russia has all the European scientists, all the industrial capacity, etc. Eventually they develop the atomic bomb, but maybe 10 or 15 year later, around 1960. Russia then conquers Canada and takes down the states, and I don't imagine there's much stopping them after that.

[Mikey]

I agree that England would have fought off conquest... but would be MUCH poorer in the bargain, without Lend/Lease or USAAC missions into Germany. All of SE Asia would be vassal states of China. France would likely be Germany light. In addition to Japan completing it's empire of the Pacific Rim, parts of NE Asia (west past Vladivostok) would also likely be Japanese territory.

The North America continent that is currently the US would likely be split into nations based on regional/cultural similarities; New England, the mid-Atlantic states, the SE, etc., would congeal into nations, but small enough to not keep the individual statehoods. As somebody said, we'd also probably see the stronger Native American Nations become leaders of multi-tribe nations - Iroquois, Sioux, Cherokee/Seminole/Cree, Apache, with smaller tribes falling into those spheres of influence: Osage becoming part of the Sioux Nation, for example.

[Sionnach Glic]

How heavier would the USSR's casualties have been if they didn't have the western front to distract the Nazis? Without the landings of Operation Overlord, the Germans would have been free to throw everything they had at the Russians. Russia would likely still win, due simply to their overwhelming numbers, but it could very well be crippled militarily after the war.

[Mikey]

That's why I expected that the Japanese, with the relative ease and lack of losses in taking over the Pacific Rim, would have been able to make inroads into NE Asia.

[Sionnach Glic]

Indeed, that would make sense.

[Graham Kennedy]

How heavier would the USSR's casualties have been if they didn't have the western front to distract the Nazis? Without the landings of Operation Overlord, the Germans would have been free to throw everything they had at the Russians. Russia would likely still win, due simply to their overwhelming numbers, but it could very well be crippled militarily after the war.

The Germans really did transfer a good many of their troops from the Western coasts off to the Eastern front after it became clear that they couldn't invade Britain. So in terms of the initial attack into Russia I doubt the presence or absence of America would make much difference.

I don't think Germany was ever really going to defeat Russia. They might have taken Moscow and other cities perhaps, but the Russians had already transferred most of their war production east of the Ural mountains, and there was simply no way the Germans were going to take those western cities and then push hundreds and hundreds of miles further on, and then cross a mountain range too. Just not possible for them, IMO.

[Mikey]

Agreed, but it certainly would have drawn more of the Russian war effort and done more damage to western Russia.

[Graham Kennedy]

No doubt, but I think the real difference would have come later in the war, during the last year or two. With no western front to worry about the Germans would have been able to put up more of a fight as they fell back from Russia. But really by that time another million or so men would not have made a lot of difference for the Germans.

Here's a question. With no western front, would Hitler and the government have moved across to France and continued a fighting retreat, or would they be committed to trying to defend Berlin at all costs and still made their last stand there?

[Mikey]

France would have been Germany Lite by then.

[Sionnach Glic]

I imagine the Germans would have pulled back to the west away from Berlin.

[Captain Seafort]

I think people are looking too far ahead - the 20th century was defined by the First World War, not the Second. Without US involvement there, while the Ludendorff offensive would probably have been stopped, it would have drained the British and French armies even more than it did. After that, the counter-offensive would have taken longer to build up momentum, and without the threat of massive US reinforcements the Germans would probably have continued fighting into 1919. The war would probably have ended in a stalemate on the Rhine with both sides exhausted, and the allies would have starved Germany into submission. Without Wilson's involvement (and even more blood split during the push to the Rhine and the German resistence there) the treaty would likely have been much harsher, with the French frontier pushed up to the Rhine.

[IanKennedy]

I imagine the Germans would have pulled back to the west away from Berlin.

Depends upon quite how man Hitler was by that point. He was really keen on attacking Russia in the first place, if they had driven him back to the point of leaving Germany I think that would have flipped him out.