US Navy Plan Gold, War with France in 1920s.

[ukron]

During the early decades of the 20th century, the United States Navy made plans to fight a host of potential enemies. Some of these future wars seemed inevitable, particularly that with Japan. Others depended on changes in current politics, but Navy planners wanted to be prepared just in case.
One of these plans, labeled “Gold,” studied a potential naval war with France. The United States had stood alongside its “oldest ally” during the First World War, but in the years immediately afterwards the Navy looked at the potential for radical politicians to change France from friend to foe. Also, the peace negotiations which followed the war revealed deep underlying tensions between the Americans and their European allies; some of the more paranoid came to believe the next war would be between Europe and America.

U.S. Navy Plan Gold is based on these plans. American officers believed the seat of conflict would be the same as that of the undeclared naval war against France in the 1790s: the Caribbean Basin.



what do you think of such AH?

[lordroel]

Jun 8, 2020 12:13:14 GMT ukron said:

U.S. Navy Plan Gold is based on these plans. American officers believed the seat of conflict would be the same as that of the undeclared naval war against France in the 1790s: the Caribbean Basin.

Would that also include the invasion of French Guiana by the United States.

[ukron]

an invasion of Martinique and Guyana by the Marines and a probable operation in Indochina (with the support of Chinese armed bands). Considering that in the 1920s, the French Army was a modern and efficient army, the Americans should have played a naval supremacy in order to avoid the arrival of reinforcements.

[stevep]

Jun 9, 2020 6:13:02 GMT ukron said:

an invasion of Martinique and Guyana by the Marines and a probable operation in Indochina (with the support of Chinese armed bands). Considering that in the 1920s, the French Army was a modern and efficient army, the Americans should have played a naval supremacy in order to avoid the arrival of reinforcements.

  That would be the key issue as the French have a markedly more powerful starting army but the US has a more powerful navy.  Also fighting in the Caribbean helps US logistics and makes it difficult for the French even without US naval superiority.  Ditto although to a lesser degree with FIC although that's also a stretch for the USN.  In both cases the reactions of the locals being invaded/liberated could also be important.  I suspect the predominantly black population of the Caribbean colonies might prefer the French rule their used to rather than coming under American control although that could depend on circumstances and what the US planned to do with the territories.  In FIC the Vietnamese weren't greatly favourable to French rule but also their deeply mistrustful of China so having Chinese 'allies' helping could backfire for the US.

  The US is likely to win if it keeps the aims limited to colonial conquests.  Invading France isn't a practical idea without a significant ally in Europe and even then would test the US severely and could be a bloody failure.  There would be likely to be a damaging trade war hurting both sides and I can definitely see France cancelling debts to the US.

  The obvious other issue is how do other powers react?  It would depend on the circumstances of what starts the war and who was seen as responsible - which might not be the same if one side has done something which other powers consider is so provocative that war is an appropriate response.  Intervention by a 3rd power could mean an actual fighting role or a degree of unbalanced neutrality.  The power most likely to intervene against the US might be Japan as its likely to be worried by the US strengthening its presence in SE Asia across their vital trade lines.  However if its seen as an American attack on colonialism you might see other powers giving some support to France.

  On the other hand if France has gone seriously off the rails and is seen as a threat to the general peace and stability you could see powers siding with, directly or indirectly, the US.  Presuming that say France goes hard fascist in the early 30's and something prevents the rise of Hitler.

  Steve

[1bigrich]

Not to drag this off-topic, but Bob Henneman's short article on the various US plans is preserved via webarchive:


web.archive.org/web/20120507155758/http://www.bobhenneman.info/rainbow.htm


Regards,

[lordroel]

Jun 9, 2020 11:48:17 GMT 1bigrich said:

Not to drag this off-topic, but Bob Henneman's short article on the various US plans is preserved via webarchive:


web.archive.org/web/20120507155758/http://www.bobhenneman.info/rainbow.htm


Regards,

No problem 1bigrich, nice link, a bit short but nice still.

So what year might the conflict be, 1920, 1925 ore 1929, as the French have older ships out of service and looking at hier list, the French did not build any new battleships in the 1920s while the United States did build the Colorado-class battleship, the last of its pre-Treaty battleships, but a war with France might them see building Colorado-class battleship.

[stevep]

Jun 9, 2020 13:52:08 GMT lordroel said:

Jun 9, 2020 11:48:17 GMT 1bigrich said:

Not to drag this off-topic, but Bob Henneman's short article on the various US plans is preserved via webarchive:


web.archive.org/web/20120507155758/http://www.bobhenneman.info/rainbow.htm


Regards,

No problem 1bigrich , nice link, a bit short but nice still.

So what year might the conflict be, 1920, 1925 ore 1929, as the French have older ships out of service and looking at hier list, the French did not build any new battleships in the 1920s while the United States did build the Colorado-class battleship, the last of its pre-Treaty battleships, but a war with France might them see building Colorado-class battleship.

  Well the implication of the plan that ukron, referrenced was after a radical  change in French politics and the main chance of that seemed to be in the early 30's. 

  If by the last bit you mean France building Colorado type ships I would say not in the war itself but possibly afterwards depending on the reaction in France.  They could have built a couple under the treaty limits IIRC but didn't because it would have taken a combination of will and funds that were somewhat lacking and might have triggered an Italian response which neither country wanted.  Both only build in the 30's after France constructed its two Strasbourg class BCs in response to the German 'pocket battleships' which were actually massively over-armed cruisers.

  If you mean the US then they might construct some modified Colorado's although possibly something larger as unless they have suffered capital ship losses any new construction would have breached the treaty limits.  Again probably only after the war was completed as there wouldn't be time during it unless it lasts 2-3 years which seems unlikely.

  Mind you such a conflict could mean the ending of the treaty agreement anyway,  If before the 1930 London Treaty your at least likely to see the ending of the battleship holiday and, which would be good for the RN, no extension of the treaty limits to cruisers which really hurt us.

[lordroel]

Jun 9, 2020 14:27:19 GMT stevep said:

Jun 9, 2020 13:52:08 GMT lordroel said:

No problem 1bigrich , nice link, a bit short but nice still.

So what year might the conflict be, 1920, 1925 ore 1929, as the French have older ships out of service and looking at hier list, the French did not build any new battleships in the 1920s while the United States did build the Colorado-class battleship, the last of its pre-Treaty battleships, but a war with France might them see building Colorado-class battleship.

  Well the implication of the plan that ukron, referrenced was after a radical  change in French politics and the main chance of that seemed to be in the early 30's. 

  If by the last bit you mean France building Colorado type ships I would say not in the war itself but possibly afterwards depending on the reaction in France.  They could have built a couple under the treaty limits IIRC but didn't because it would have taken a combination of will and funds that were somewhat lacking and might have triggered an Italian response which neither country wanted.  Both only build in the 30's after France constructed its two Strasbourg class BCs in response to the German 'pocket battleships' which were actually massively over-armed cruisers.

  If you mean the US then they might construct some modified Colorado's although possibly something larger as unless they have suffered capital ship losses any new construction would have breached the treaty limits.  Again probably only after the war was completed as there wouldn't be time during it unless it lasts 2-3 years which seems unlikely.

  Mind you such a conflict could mean the ending of the treaty agreement anyway,  If before the 1930 London Treaty your at least likely to see the ending of the battleship holiday and, which would be good for the RN, no extension of the treaty limits to cruisers which really hurt us.

Well one of the scenarios that is always being played with is Germany wins the Great War, France becomes fascist and rearms in the 1930s, instead of going for a new round with Germany, they go for a war with the United states.

[stevep]

Jun 9, 2020 14:29:47 GMT lordroel said:

Jun 9, 2020 14:27:19 GMT stevep said:

  Well the implication of the plan that ukron , referrenced was after a radical  change in French politics and the main chance of that seemed to be in the early 30's. 

  If by the last bit you mean France building Colorado type ships I would say not in the war itself but possibly afterwards depending on the reaction in France.  They could have built a couple under the treaty limits IIRC but didn't because it would have taken a combination of will and funds that were somewhat lacking and might have triggered an Italian response which neither country wanted.  Both only build in the 30's after France constructed its two Strasbourg class BCs in response to the German 'pocket battleships' which were actually massively over-armed cruisers.

  If you mean the US then they might construct some modified Colorado's although possibly something larger as unless they have suffered capital ship losses any new construction would have breached the treaty limits.  Again probably only after the war was completed as there wouldn't be time during it unless it lasts 2-3 years which seems unlikely.

  Mind you such a conflict could mean the ending of the treaty agreement anyway,  If before the 1930 London Treaty your at least likely to see the ending of the battleship holiday and, which would be good for the RN, no extension of the treaty limits to cruisers which really hurt us.

Well one of the scenarios that is always being played with is Germany wins the Great War, France becomes fascist and rearms in the 1930s, instead of going for a new round with Germany, they go for a war with the United states.

  lordroel,

  I would say that would be very ASB.  If France went fascist and really tooled up its target would be Germany and similar Germany would seek to per-empt such a threat by attacking before the French became too powerful.  Paris would be looking for allies against Germany not risking fights with other powers that would make them even more vulnerable,

  Steve

 

[lordroel]

Jun 9, 2020 14:58:21 GMT stevep said:

Jun 9, 2020 14:29:47 GMT lordroel said:

Well one of the scenarios that is always being played with is Germany wins the Great War, France becomes fascist and rearms in the 1930s, instead of going for a new round with Germany, they go for a war with the United states.

  lordroel,

  I would say that would be very ASB.  If France went fascist and really tooled up its target would be Germany and similar Germany would seek to per-empt such a threat by attacking before the French became too powerful.  Paris would be looking for allies against Germany not risking fights with other powers that would make them even more vulnerable,

  Steve

 

Then the French win the war as OTL, but than years afterwards, before the rise of Third Reich of course the French go left ore right in extreme.

[ukron]

Jun 9, 2020 11:48:17 GMT 1bigrich said:

Not to drag this off-topic, but Bob Henneman's short article on the various US plans is preserved via webarchive:


web.archive.org/web/20120507155758/http://www.bobhenneman.info/rainbow.htm


Regards,

Thanks for the link

[ukron]

Jun 9, 2020 14:29:47 GMT lordroel said:

Jun 9, 2020 14:27:19 GMT stevep said:

Well one of the scenarios that is always being played with is Germany wins the Great War, France becomes fascist and rearms in the 1930s, instead of going for a new round with Germany, they go for a war with the United states.

There was never a real fascist party or group in France in the 20-30s, and the possibility of seeing such a political movement formed even in the case of a defeat against Germany during the first war is very small, considering the number of monarchists, Bonapartists, ultra-republican soldiers, Catholics and others.

[stevep]

Jun 10, 2020 7:03:44 GMT ukron said:

Jun 9, 2020 14:29:47 GMT lordroel said:

Well one of the scenarios that is always being played with is Germany wins the Great War, France becomes fascist and rearms in the 1930s, instead of going for a new round with Germany, they go for a war with the United states.

There was never a real fascist party or group in France in the 20-30s, and the possibility of seeing such a political movement formed even in the case of a defeat against Germany during the first war is very small, considering the number of monarchists, Bonapartists, ultra-republican soldiers, Catholics and others.

  It did seem unlikely from what relatively little I'm aware of it.  As you say the French right is rather fractured.   However I was thinking that might be the concern mention in the US plan about an extreme government emerging in France.  More likely in a world where the allies lost WWI but then as I say I can't see Germany not stomping on such a regime probably before the US is even aware of it.  Unless the German empire has totally imploded in the post-war period which is unlikely but possible.  Possibly something like Franco's regime might emerge which tries to cover as much of the right as possible but even that's likely to be too cautious to clash with Germany let alone the US.

[stevep]

Jun 9, 2020 11:48:17 GMT 1bigrich said:

Not to drag this off-topic, but Bob Henneman's short article on the various US plans is preserved via webarchive:


web.archive.org/web/20120507155758/http://www.bobhenneman.info/rainbow.htm


Regards,

  1bigrich,

  Thanks, very interesting.  Especially taking a step back to the 'home page' and some of the other points listed.

  Steve

[ukron]

Considering that the First World War took place IRL and that the United States envisages a war with France, I think that England has no reason to support the United States, but no intention to take part in the conflict. What do you think?