Let's say there's an Allied victory in World War One in roughly the same manner as OTL, but with no US entry. It might be Austria falling apart in 1917, or maybe something else; but, even if Germany doesn't go fascist (which it still could if there's enough instability), there is still Japan's military buidup and a likely Pacific War.
The question is, what would the US see as their role? Would the desire for isolation be near as great if over 100,000 lives hadn't been lost in WW1? Would there be more of a desire to at least have a Lend-Lease type of senario? For all we know, it could be the Societs and Japan forming a bloc, which would make thigns more interesting (and maybe American wouldn't feel as threatened but go after Japan first)?
What would the military situation be like? One of the interesting things to consideris how different the wars were - any lessons about rench warfare wouldn't have to be unlearned; but on the other hand, would you have the career officers who had served in WW1 and were thus ready to be the leaders in WW2?
I guess part of it depends on the timing of everything, too. There would be a big recession even if not the Great Depression - speculation and other factors led to it, too, not just the effects of WW1. But, who would bepresident and take the fall in '32 might depend on how 1916 went. If butterflies put Hughes in the White House after a slightly more successful Brusilov Offensive, and Austria collapses, Hughes might win re-election in 1920 and then maybe Hoover for 2 terms? Or someone like James Cox in 1924, it's hard to say. But, if Bryan wins in 1912 and has to be badgered just to keep trading with Britain, and then stops all trade with Europe once the Germans start unrestricted sub warfare (but would Bryan be forced to declare war, anyway? Maybe), then you might get the democrats winning in 1920 and the Republicans taking over in 1932.
The question is, what would the US see as their role? Would the desire for isolation be near as great if over 100,000 lives hadn't been lost in WW1? Would there be more of a desire to at least have a Lend-Lease type of senario? For all we know, it could be the Societs and Japan forming a bloc, which would make thigns more interesting (and maybe American wouldn't feel as threatened but go after Japan first)?
What would the military situation be like? One of the interesting things to consideris how different the wars were - any lessons about rench warfare wouldn't have to be unlearned; but on the other hand, would you have the career officers who had served in WW1 and were thus ready to be the leaders in WW2?
I guess part of it depends on the timing of everything, too. There would be a big recession even if not the Great Depression - speculation and other factors led to it, too, not just the effects of WW1. But, who would bepresident and take the fall in '32 might depend on how 1916 went. If butterflies put Hughes in the White House after a slightly more successful Brusilov Offensive, and Austria collapses, Hughes might win re-election in 1920 and then maybe Hoover for 2 terms? Or someone like James Cox in 1924, it's hard to say. But, if Bryan wins in 1912 and has to be badgered just to keep trading with Britain, and then stops all trade with Europe once the Germans start unrestricted sub warfare (but would Bryan be forced to declare war, anyway? Maybe), then you might get the democrats winning in 1920 and the Republicans taking over in 1932.
