If the Bolsheviks struck first while the bulk of the Heer and Luftwaffe were busy driving US Muhreens off of Glasgow followed by demographic adjustments of a few million Slovakian and Hungarian civilians before getting 70 divisions cut off in the Carpathians leading to a desperate breakout towards Berlin that ends in fuel starvation and lynchings by armed civilians/Hitlerjugend at Liegnitz would FDR still have provided lend-lease?

>>17125 >would FDR still have provided lend-lease? Why would he? Soviets have rolled-over majority of germany by themselfs. More then any allied nation.

>>17125 >>17127 In theory ww2 was fought to liberate Poland from occupation, and yet they were more than happy to support the USSR, ignoring that they occupied half of Poland. I don't think they'd say no a willing ally.

>>17125 >Operation Sealion. >Feasible. WW2 is not my speciality but. Wouldn't the most posible way to the anglos surrendering a simple ceasefire instead of an outright invasion?

>>17130 If the Germans and Italians had a proper alliance, then in theory they could take over Malta, and then push into Egypt, thus closing off the Suez canal. Then they'd have to concentrate their submarines and air force in France, and that combined with the longer shipping route between Asia and Britain might be enough to starve out Britain. But that requires concrete plans and good coöperation, therefore at this point we are speaking about a ww2-themed fantasy novel.

>>17133 >closing off the Suez canal. Would Italian Rheinübungen in the 1942 western Indian Ocean have any funny effects on the situation in East Asia? IIRC the Royal Navy had a limited presence there and even feared the Japanese might attempt an invasion of Ceylon early in the Pacific war.

>>17137 I don't even know if Italian ships are capable of operation in that ocean. Although I can see them going down in the Red Sea and maybe do fun things around the Horn of Africa. The absolute best I can imagine is taking Madagascar with surface ships and then building airfields and submarine bases there. But if I'm not mistaken German submarines were already operating in the Indian Ocean, and going down there through the Suez Canal would certainly make their lives easier. Still, what would be absolutely hilarious if the German-Italian forces liberated Syria, then Iraq, then finally Iran. At that point they'd have a direct land connection to India, and at the part that later became Pakistan. Now I imagine the Brits would send in the Indian army at force, and maybe the Germans could unite all the various Moslems for a counter-jihad. Even if only the Iranians get as fanatical as they were in our timeline during the Iraq-Iran war, that will mean gigantic causalities on both sides. Maybe that would give enough ammo for the Indian independence movement to overthrow the British colonial government, and I can't even imagine where would that lead.

>>17125 >would FDR still have provided lend-lease? Maybe not, but the question would become would FDR have been providing the Soviets aid since 1936 under every excuse in the book like he did in real life. Yes, the Soviets barely used Lend Lease to crush Germany. But roughly 70% of what is called Russian production was made using American equipment in mostly American-designed factories, with Americans priming the pump of resources.

>>17124 Is that gif a what-if the Russo-Japanese war had become ww1 scenario? >>17130 Yes, the invasion was impossible, a complete pipe dream, what Germany could have done is reach a stalemate at best. >>17133 >If the Germans and Italians had a proper alliance Not even then, not by a long shot >>17138 The axis could've reached Syria and Iraq, but i have a really hard time seeing them getting past Iran, it's too mountainous and under-developed, they had a difficult enough time with logistics already, trying to supply an Indian expedition in any meaningful way doesn't seem possible to me. Mind you, the brits could've gotten really scared at the prospect of a pincer attack Japs coming from Burma like they did irl and sue for peace.

>>17141 >Not even then, not by a long shot Why? The Brits thought they could easily take Malta, and I know that there not that many ports in North Africa, but Egypt was willing to switch sides the moment the Axis reaches their territory. >i have a really hard time seeing them getting past Iran, Indeed, but that's not the point. Once Iran openly sides with them a token force in that country is enough to make the Brits feel threatened enough to panic.

>>17142 >Why? Germany just didn't have the resources to make such an operation possible, amphibious invasions are extremely hard at the best of times, how were they gonna invade the island with the biggest navy in the world? one that dwarfed theirs, how were they gonna keep them supplied? we all know the Germans aren't the best at logistics. >The Brits thought they could easily take Malta What they thought and what was actually possible are different things, Malta is not at all comparable with the UK in any case. Sealion is just not possible in any realistic what-if scenario, unless you're counting on it being a massive failure that would shorten the war by years, the axis reaching Suez, the Levant and Mesopotamia is realistic, but don't ignore that they were already tied to the Russian quagmire, gains in the middle east mean little if the eastern front goes the way it did irl, i have a hard time seeing it go any other way short of the German high command going full total war from the beginning War production mostly Germany kept a lot of their industry producing civilian goods even long after everyone else had switched to a war economy so Barbarrossa doesn't lose steam 2/3rds of the way to knocking the soviets out..

>>17143 Anon, read that post again. >>17133 >If the Germans and Italians had a proper alliance, then in theory they could take over Malta >but don't ignore that they were already tied to the Russian quagmire, gains in the middle east mean little if the eastern front goes the way it did irl I'm not ignoring that, the part about concrete plans and good coöperation also refers to things like Germany not attacking the USSR before finishing the UK, or Italy not invading Greece just for the fun of it. That's why I wrote that at this point we are speaking about a ww2-themed fantasy novel.

Do anons think the war would've been significantly different if Brazil stuck with the Axis all the way through? I know Vargas was sympathetic of the Axis, but Brazil was eventually put into a stranglehold and joined the Allies. If I recall, they went through a few campaigns in Italy. Forgive me if this sounds like a dumb question. I'm not terribly well versed in WW2. I'm just fascinated that South America is often overlooked in this scenario, even though it's called a "world war". Tidbits about other LATAM nations are welcome too.

>>17145 South America is mostly overlooked because South America was part of the so-called 'Monroe Clique', the faction controlled by the US. When the US entered, the rest of the Americas (sans Canada, which responded to the Allies) entered, whether officially or unofficially. Brazil's earlier actions were done with the express permission of the US. People forget that the US was originally leaning Axis as well and FDR was trying to play both sides until Hitler foolishly declared war on the US trying to get Japan's aid. Forgotten (read: covered over) fact: The US had been shipping Nazi Germany supplies as well as England as recently as November 1941. Minor tangential rant: I am sick of modern armerifat 'education' claiming the US were part of the Allies. The Allies were England's faction, which the US was never a part of. Allies != Allied Powers.

>>17144 >Anon, read that post again. <pic >we are speaking about a ww2-themed fantasy novel. Alright, guess that's fine, but too unrealistic for me, i find realistic scenarios more interesting than complete fantasy ones, after all, this is more an exercise to learn than ideas for a video game's plot there one can go as fantastical as one wishes >>17145 It would have been more fun, South America was pretty much spared from the war, it would've been interesting to have had a South American Theater with proper land battles and not just a handful of naval actions and submarine attacks. The funny thing with Brazil is that their version of fascism was anti-racist. >>17147 >People forget that the US was originally leaning Axis Isn't that pushing it? i'd say they were neutrality leaning if anything, though there was a significant support for the axis in the sectors of the population.

>>17149 >Isn't that pushing it? When the entire US Army, Navy, and Marine Corps were making war plans against the British Empire with the assumption of German aid, I don't really think it's pushing it. A reminder that War Plan Red assumed the assistance of 'an unnamed European Ally'. They certainly weren't talking about France. Remember that prior to Germany siding with Japan over China, FDR had nothing but good things to say about Hitler and the Nazis in general - in fact, 90% of their ideology matched up. If Germany had told Japan to back off (or Japan took America's deal to fight the USSR in the Meeting of Five Armies several years earlier), it's almost certain that the US would have gone Axis and the world would have turned out a lot differently.

What if Tito never split off from the soviet Union? How would it affect the cold war in the long term?

>>17141 >Is that gif a what-if the Russo-Japanese war had become ww1 scenario Yes

>>17157 *Sage

>>17153 Probably Non-Aligned moment is formed with India-Egypt ahead instead and pajeets at the helm. Yugo still probably gonna break up since Tito's sheer will alongisde his hopes and dreams was the sole thing holding the republic togeather. Not very plausible since Tito/Stalin started going for the neck REAL fast post WW2. Here's a few fun ideas for you guys: Lin Biao and the 751 plan (It's rymes with "Armed uprising") kick off sucessfully and Mao's raproachment with the west is thwarted and Mao is killed. Zhou Enlai isn't retarded and at the Lushan conference they coup out Mao for Peng Dehuai. Deng Xiaoping and Peng end up dissolving the CPC (those two were never "real" communists) and the Sino-Soviet split occurs in 1959. The Argies actually are competent enough to not reverse the torpedo gyros and their two subs intercep the British Carrier force of Sierra Leoine

>>17130 Operation Sealion is basically impossible yes. Don't forget that the inverse, D-Day, took the world's two largest navies, air superiority, good support from locals and a deception operation to move reserves and still wasn't a sure thing. There were also giant floating harbours and literal pipelines across the channel. The logistics of a naval invasion at scale are terrifying meanwhile Sealion plans proposed towing barges across which is a joke not to mention the German reliance on horses for transport adding a whole extra level of headache. There are two paths to knocking the UK out barring perhaps adding decades onto the timeline and/or proposing nukes. Firstly starvation but arguably continental Europe is at almost as much of a risk of starvation as the UK is plenty of incidents of starvation and resource shortages during WW2 unless they can swing around and kill the bulk of the USSR. Secondly threaten the Empire enough (close the Suez, pressure Spain to make noises about joining so Gibraltar is threatened) and offer very reasonable terms to both the UK and France to bow out and go fuck up the nips. This would require Germany to have stuck with allying with the Chinese instead of swapping to the Japanese but that probably would have worked better anyway since Japan would have acted the same alliance or not. It would also require Mussolini to not demand too much and that's a potential issue too. >>17143 >Germany kept a lot of their industry producing civilian goods even long after everyone else had switched to a war economy If memory serves it was 1943, after Stalingrad was fully retaken, that they finally went for a proper total war economy. >>17153 The real question is what if the Sino-Soviet split never happened. That had a far larger effect on the Cold War and led to post-Mao China being subtly backed by the USA.

Could the n*zis have built a semi-mass production capable crude supercavitating torpedo or better yet rocket propelled midget submarines if a Strelok with Superkavitierender Unterwasserlaufkörper blueprints and extensive engineering+physics knowledge behind the weapon system were to get isekai'd back to June 1st 1940 Berlin?

>>17547 >Could the n*zis have built a semi-mass production capable crude supercavitating torpedo No, the infrastructure required to build practical supercavitation wouldn't exist for another ~30 years and even if you carried back plans to build all of that, it'd take longer than WW2 did just to build them. Same thing goes with your spoiler due to underwater rocket propulsion.

Would KR Murica and Britain's economies really have crashed with no survivors by the mid-1920s? I could possibly see it happen in the UK by virtue of massive debt and trying to keep up with Willy's and Tirpitz' hyper-dreadnought construction programs making full use of Germany's industrial might with no more pesky resource shortages, naval treaties, multi-front land war or budgetary limits, but was the US so dependent on the British economy that a successful mid-1920s socialist rebellion combined with the G*rms capturing Britain's colonies in the chaos would create a decade long great depression?

>>18346 >Would KR Murica and Britain's economies really have crashed with no survivors by the mid-1920s? Possibly, but I'm not sure about america. I don't know much about the postWW1 to say much. Also TL191 post 2GW japan and some otherTL191 stuff

How would Strelok fix the Kansas problem if he could truck himself back to the 1850s?

>>19649 Perhaps you could give a brief overview of what the "kansas problem" was you are referring to?

>>19650 The Bleeding Kansas mini-civil war that served as a prelude to the American civil war.

What if Hitler got deported back to Austria-Hungary and was conscripted into its army. What would've the war been like for him?

>>19805 There are too many possibilities for us to consider. For all we know the most likely answer is that he dies in a random accident during the first year of the war. Or maybe he ends up saving the Dual Monarchy out of sheer spite towards the entente pigdogs.

What if Brazil's emperor wasn't deposed in a coup?

>>19815 Brazil would be a serious country.

Texas Annexing Greater California America Annexing Canada during the war of 1812, or just straight up continue the revolutionary war and liberate Scotia Nova so the French did not have to relocate to Louisiana. Liberia expanding territory and implimenting Thomas Jefferson's final solution. The berber states becoming apart of greater Liberia. The Spanish American war never happening. Would the Philippines be enough oil for the Japanese who I assume would have good ties with Francos Spain. The end of the three Kingdoms period never ending for both Chosen and zonghua. Mongols taken over all that land all the way up to the Volga and reigned a Empire for at least 7 centuries. Persia conquering India and getting rid of Hinduism completely in place of Zoroastrianism. ï.e no caste system but replaced by different slave system. Pegan Barbarians winning over Jeudeo Christian Romans not only on military grounds with fall of rome but also prevent spread of Christianity any farther north than the Alps for the subsequent future. Trojan War: The Hot Lady Sparta and Athens mad about instead fathers a Million plus Childern and coups Trojan Empire and Annex Athens and Sparta with her children.

>>19805 Sorry, but I couldn't think of anything else.

Would there be any notable changes in 20th century US infrastructural and industrial development if NEMA chose to adopt 230V 50hz AC power and Schuko-style plugs as the national standard in the interwar period?

>>19830 I don't know. But I'm not sure if this is /k/ related.

>>17124 Damn this would be cool and all yet all of this would result for /k/ not existing and that is kinda sad.

How much of an impact would the Imperial German Army choosing to adopt the Mondragon M1908 as their basic service rifle circa 1910 have in the early months of the Great War?

>>19860 It could be possible that the soldiers would be better prepared at the trench war, maybe even making the german army win most battles, but that depends on generals and other strategists how good the battles shall end. Also I don't know the maintence of mondragon, so if someone would help me, it would be nice.

>>19830 Power generation and high voltage distributions would not really change I don't think, the final step down transformers would be slightly different. Industrial loads use 3-phase power - whole different ball of wax than the split phase power used in residential/commercial.

>>19860 It would have just resulted in faster adoption of semi-auto rifles for troops in the trenches by the opposing side. Most trench combat was hand-to-hand or required guys to steal carbines from the cavalry anyway

Japan form written language around 500 BC, and by 400 BC they underwent large scale agricultural revolution, by 300 BC they have decent metal working industry. Thier art and ritual of making Statue of Pregnant Women is much more widespread. By 200 bce the population is at 6 million. By 100 CE they finished a Civil War and the Families United (no sengoku period). No warring states period, and a Strong Slave State formed. Transition into a Peasant economy 400 years later but by 150 CE they start Raiding parties and spread like the Vikings did, becoming a empire. What would the possible wars would look like and would they stand a chance at Han or Mongol Empire?

If Italo Balbo hadn't gotten spaghetti'd by his own pizza cooks would the North African campaign have yielded any better results for the Axis?

>>19897 The thing about all empires prior to about the mid 1800s is that chemical fertilizers didn't exist outside Britain's guano mines and similar ventures. They are all doomed to fall when there's a famine brought on by a poor harvest or six. I don't think the Japanese even understood crop rotation until the hundreds.

Also even at 6 million strong, the ancient Japanese could not have won much more than sea battles. The region was sino-centric because Chins had a population that fluctuated between 30 million and 100 million roughly until the late 1500s when their population skyrocketed. Most of early history was fought using simple ranged weapons like the sling.

>>19906 >>19907 I was saying they did have chemical fertilizers for the sake of alternative history. I'd reckon they could've had the Philippines, Indonesia and Australia before the anglos arrived and the population then would be much greater half a millennia later.

>>19992 >Chemical fertilizers If they discovered that then they'd be the current history edition of the british empire. Literally prequisites for chemical fertilizers require a certain degree of industrialization. tl;dr we'd all be speaking weeb.

>>19997 Jesus christ, I've seen shit like that. Japanese kongo, japanese USA. Two chinas.

If the Japanese hadn't occupied Manchuria in 1931 would it be possible to get the Republic of China to sign the anti-Comintern pact? How would FDR view Japan if something like the Marco Polo bridge incident happened on the Sino-Soviet border circa 1939-1940, forcing the Chinese into war with the Soviet Union and leading Japan to "help" the ROC so the Commies don't threaten Korea in exchange for generous concessions in Manchuria? Would it make Barbarossa strategically feasible if Zhukov was busy leading a huge far eastern front against endlessly respawning starving illiterate pitchfork wielding bugmen? Would FDR let the Japanese join the Allies to legally rape Nanking even if they'd gain large amounts of land/resources they wouldn't be willing to return after the war? How cursed would a US-Soviet-Japanese cold war in China be?

>>20036 Strelok, the US had been trying to ally with Japan against the Soviets before they invaded Manchuria. Even afterwards, they made a last ditch effort to ally with the Japanese by offering to internationally recognize their claim on 'Manchuko' so long as they left the rest of China and American holdings in the Pacific alone (Philippines, Wake, Guam, and Hawaii) - backed up by most favorable trade deals on oil, electronics, and other such goods that Japan didn't have access to, with offers to explore for oil exploitation in Japanese holdings. The US was even offering to build Japan tanks, artillery, and other war material, but Japan said no and wanted everything for themselves - even going so far as to demand Hawaii from the US, which made FDR decide that Japan was going to be the target of his war. IF Japan hadn't pulled their historical stunts, the US - which had no love for England at the time - probably would have joined the Axis. Recall that the US was making preparations for war against England as late as 1937 and FDR had nothing but praise for Hitler until then as well. Before Japan rebuffed America's offer, even FDR had nothing but scorn for Stalin; afterwards, he opened up communications with the Soviets and started appointing communist sympathizers (George Marshall, for example). So, yeah, the present state of the world is Japan's fault; man, that got off on a tangent.

>>20036 Strelok, I don't know what you're smoking but you've gone from plausible alternate history to fiction. Remember that the "moderate" Tōseiha clique in the army held control ever since the 2-2-6 coup was crushed by the emperor. Had the Tōseiha clique been crushed instead of the Kōdōha by the emperor (unlikely, as the emperor's court favored the Tōseiha), then Japan would have struck north against the Soviets. Considering both army factions wanted expansion, collision with US interests is inevitable, especially since the dutch east oilfields is a question of when, not if. The only real way they don't push China at some point is if the civilian "democratic/liberal" faction manages to get rid of both cliques (even MORE unlikely). And if that happens, well, Chiang's going to go after Japan in 1945 (That's when they thought he would have finished the "modernization" of China) Japan in the 1930s is calm on the surface, but eerie close to a civil war. The fact Hirohito managed to navigate and play all sides to suit his preference of the strike south idea is quite the feat. Some may argue that he was forced into it, but I would argue they wouldn't even bother and forcibly abdicate him in favor of his son, Yasuhito instead >Zhukov If we talk a about a strictly plausible realm, Zhukov's appearance is not strictly necessary, there are other "great" generals in the USSR like Konev, Tukhachevsky, Shaposhnikov, Vasilevsky, Rokossovsky, Malinovsky, Varfolomeev , Isserson among others (I note the latter two for their theory contributions). The 2-2-6 incident happens in Feb, 1936, the first Moscow Trial is in August of 1936. It would be plausible that Stalin decides to not purge the military if it becomes obvious that both Japan and Germany will be enemies.

>>20037 >US was making preparations for war against England as late as 1937 Sauce? I know the US was buddy buddy with German Nazis up to the war but war with England?

>>20040 >Zhukov Someone else could have filled Zhukov's shoes almost certainly, but >a huge far eastern front Would definitely be a problem. USSR's ace was the ability to relocate manufacturing and training to Ural/Siberia regions in relative safety. An eastern front would fuck that up big time especially since it's such a vast area to cover.

>>20036 >How would FDR view Japan Badly. It wouldn't matter what they did. FDR wrote and had published, under his own name, multiple essays about how he hated Nihonjin with such fervor that even /pol/ would wonder what the fuck his problem was and wonder if he being given a platform by the Macon Telegraph to make racism look bad: Remember that at the time he published these he was the guy who ordered some guys in the Navy to have gay sex (which was rape) to to prove they and the people they fucked were gay and throw them out of the navy. That's why he suppressed the FBI and Naval Intelligence reports that said there was no threat from nikkei: Because it would hurt his excuse of using government power to smash them. The more you learn about FDR the more he makes comic book supervilains seem sane and rational.

>>20046 >he was the guy who ordered some guys in the Navy to have gay sex (which was rape) to to prove they and the people they fucked were gay and throw them out of the navy. S-sauce?

>>20047 Newport Scandal.

What is it lately with one entrenched camp saying Roosevelt was secretly a misunderstood good guy and the other saying he was Moloch incarnate?

>>20050 Most of the big government actions today can be justified because of policies under FDR. He essentially made the 1 year depression a four year depression and the only reason he was stopped was because the states were going bankrupt and threatening civil war if he didn't stop his mad campaign. Essentially he's the textbook example of everything that goes wrong when giving one man near-infinite power. The American education system damn near deifies him as a propaganda tool to justify big government actions today.

>>20050 He was insecure enough about his disability to be driven around in a Willys Jeep at public appearances. He also got a love boner for Stalin personally and threw Churchill (and Eastern Europe) under the bus.

>>20045 >eastern front I'm not sure how much that Japanese would be able to supply in Siberia given the relative lack of infrastructure compared to even China. Pull up the siberian railroad... and well... Plus, they only need to move their shit east of the Urals. Germans never had a proper strategic bomber. The more interesting question, how bad would lend lease be disrupted if they were forced to take Artic convoy ONLY routes.

>>20044 >sauce War Plan Red/Crimson/Scarlet was the US's mid-1930s era plans to fight the entirety of the British Empire all at the same time with the help of an unnamed European ally. These were from War Plan Rainbow, the same family of plans that brought us the mostly successful War Plan Orange. It's important to point out that in 1938 War Plan Black (the US' war plans against Germany) hadn't been updated since WW1.

How would gay cold war proxy wars have been conducted if chemical weapons weren't banned or hampered by PR optics somehow? Would North Korea have any arable land left after the Korean war?

>>20068 >Would North Korea have any arable land left after the Korean war? You answered your own question. It would be abused once or twice, and then people would realize that they are essentially salting the earth and waging wars of eradication (few civilized men's wars were wars of eradication). By essentially chemically salting the earth on a massive scale, you're going to cause some pretty massive climate changes due to the disappearance of entire forest systems, and then the important nations are going to see that and promptly shit bricks. If not banned outright they would be heavily restricted in short order after actually being used. Also the US was more eager to find a way to weaponize literal nightmare fuel. Right now the newage censored internet is trying to keep me from using related search terms to locate the wikipedia article.

>>20059 Would be great if US had Canada and allied with the Spainards or France in that scenario. >>20068 They did do that anon....

>>20072 Agent Orange wasn't an anti-personnel agent though it was a demographic one.

>>20070 What is "literal nightmare fuel"?

>>20083 I don't remember the name of it and all the search results of the modern era prevent you from looking up things that make countries look bad. In any case it was a toxin that the American military derived that had effects similar to Anatoxin-a. Essentially it caused muscle spasms throughout the body and lung paralysis at lethal doses, while causing seizures, schizophrenic-like behavior, and hallucinations at non-lethal doses (that usually ended up killing them anyways). IIRC it was based on Japanese research they had confiscated.

Zangara hits FDR and Garner's policies allow the great depression to end instead of extend it to a decade. As the US is selling resources (including oil) to both sides (instead giving stuff to one side and refusing sale to the other in total violation of neutrality) minus Soviets (who won't get anything till they pay the WW1 debts they defaulted on), so Pearl Harbor never happens and the US doesn't get pulled into the war until it declares war on Germany (and only Germany) in 1943 in response to unrestricted submarine warfare. Other than adopting .276 Pederson and a better SMG, how would US arms and equipment differ in this timeline?

>>17127 >Why would he? Because he was a fucking communist himself and didn't give a shit about the law or public opinion.

>>20231 If you want an alternative history featuring .276 Pedersen, just say that the US actually adopted .303 British, and then quickly realized that reworking a clip-fed self-loading rifle for rimmed ammo would be too much of a hassle. They were actual talks about adopting 7.7mm Bong, so it wouldn't even be that much of a stretch. Of course for an even more alternative history we could say that they adopt the Vickers, the Lewis, and make the P14 their standard rifle, and so American small arms developments becomes a mess once they adopt a .276 Pedersen rifle and decide in the last moment to replace the rest of their ww1 vintage firearms for ww2. Also, once the Cold War starts, this scenario could lead to the FAL chambered for .276 Pedersen becoming a true NATO standard, because it would be a fair improvement over the M14 in the jungle.

Would there have been major changes in the development of naval warfare if the Second Pacific Squadron had been forced to abandon its grand voyage to Port Arthur and sail back to port after the Dogger Bank incident?

>>20231 The navy would be the most heavily impacted, to the point that we might try to back out of the second LNT. That's a pretty huge change, so let's assume it doesn't happen. With no IJN carriers wrecking our shit, the battleship advocates will have a much stronger case since British carriers haven't had much success by this point. I'd expect at least one or two more SoDaks or Iowas ordered, maybe three if the battleship faction actually manages to get some carriers canceled. The Montanas would definitely be completed. We'd also have a lot more modern destroyers available early on, to the point that we probably wouldn't need to bother with DEs. The biggest changes to the army would be a switch to .276 and the procurement of a new LMG (probably just an upside-down BAR with a bigger magazine and replaceable barrels). The M1 carbine might not be procured at all, or might evolve into an early assault rifle. We'd probably keep the Thompson, AFAIK the army was pretty happy with them aside from the pricetag. The tank scare that led to the Lee and M10 doesn't happen here, so Sherman and Hellcat probably enter service a few months early but are otherwise unchanged. The USAAF would actually be kind of screwed in this timeline, since they haven't had two years of combat experience to beat the stupid out of them. I'm not sure if we'd be building Merlins before the war in this scenario, so we might also enter the war without an effective high-altitude fighter. USN aviation is much better off, but wouldn't see a ton of action since the naval war is pretty much over by the end of 1943. >>20276 With no big victory, Japan doesn't go full retard (in more than one sense). The US might not realize the value of plunging fire so early, and Jackie Fisher's theories wouldn't be vindicated for a bit longer. The rest of the world would normalize after WW1, but Japan is completely unrecognizable by 1940.

>>20302 >The M1 carbine might not be procured at all, or might evolve into an early assault rifle Actually, come to mention it, the .30 Carbine would never exist in a .276 Pedersen world since it was chosen for because they could share the .30 cal tooling with .30-06. .276 is a unique diameter from what I can tell, as far as I can tell, .30 cal is the only place where good for pistol and good for rifle overlap.

No one cares about the big picture. Americans used to be outraged about Bruce Jenner, Greta Thunberg, statues, Epstein, Smollett, and George Floyd. Now Americans have lost their minds about Biden, but no one cares that the US is a bankrupt warmongering police state.

>>20376 People only give a shit about themselves. Shit like Epstein affected their kids and shit like Biden forces them to reorient their goals in order to not get fucked in this economy where no job is sacred and immune to being outsourced. People can't give a shit about the fact that everything is clown world when their very livelihoods are at risk and this won't change until the water is already boiling. Our current society is focused on avoiding blame at all costs instead of fixing the problem. You can thank the military industrial complex for that one. You were born too early to participate in societal collapse so you might as well ride the tiger and find a way to profit off of useful idiots. Can't speak for anyone else but Chink Flu alone reduced my standards of living from emerging middle class who could afford nice things back to the poverty line thanks to the electronics industry collapsing and minimum wage skyrocketing in my home state while people are already down on their luck. I don't have time to give a shit about the raping of Common Law when I have to work to eat.