Thoughts on US and Finland Entry into War

[Edwin P.]

From playing a game as Allies vs AI (V1.07):

1> Would the US have entered the war if France has not fallen and if substantial numbers of Russian troops had entered Germany? The AI US did, but in real life I think that Germany would not have declared war on the US if France had not fallen and the US would have focused its war efforts on defeating the Japanese.

In fact, I would say that the US should not enter the war if (France and Russia and the UK have not fallen) and if 4+ Russian Units are in Germany.

2> Would Finland have joined the Axis after substantial numbers of Russian troops entered Germany and if the Finish border was strongly garrisoned by Soviet troops? The AI Finland did and was eliminated.

Would Finland join the Axis and march into Leningrad if all Soviet troops were assigned to fighting the Germans and Leningrad was not garrisoned? I think so, but the AI did not take advantage of the ungarrisoned Leningrad.

[santabear]

Agree 100% on Finland. In SC they seem to be too much influenced by what happens to Sweden, and not enough concerned with USSR.

US: The US might enter the war even if it weren't "needed" (i.e. French surviving, Russians whomping Germany), in order to safeguard US interests in Europe. It would not be in the best interests of the US to let the Russians win the war in Europe and thereby dominate the continent. Therefore, the US might delclare on Germany just to get their foot in the door at the peace settlement. So that particular quirk might be somewhat 'realistic.'

[JerseyJohn]

The reasoning concerning the U. S. makes sense by any rational argument. But the population was very anti-war at the time. As late as the mid-fifties I remember many Americans saying it was a big mistake to get involved, as though we hadn't been attacked in the Pacific and declared war against in the Atlantic. One thing I remember hearing many times was the United States should have stayed home and let the Nazis and Communists destroy each other. This sounds simple-minded, but from 1939 to 1941 Stalin was following that same policy regarding Germany and England.

Getting back to the topic, I don't think U. S. involvement should be certain. I'm not at all sure that short of either a major direct attack (Pearl Harbor) or a declaration of war against the U. S. (Germany and Italy), that America would have entered the war at all.

It ought to be remembered that two U. S. destroyers were lost in action against U-boats with American gunboats already having been sunk by the Japanese in China. FDR tried to stir public opinion with those incidents and raised almost no enthusiasm for US involvement in either ocean.

[ April 13, 2003, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Edwin P.]

I agree that the US entry should not be certain if the Allies (UK and Russia) are beating Germany. Moreover, such a change would give the Axis player a fighting, but slim chance to stage a comeback.

Thus there should be a chance that if the (Allies hold France) and (Russia forces are in Germany) that the US War readiness decreases or holds steady each turn, perhaps influenced by any Sub attacks on Merchant ship convoys (which increases war readiness) or the number of German cities held by the allies (which decreases war readiness)

[santabear]

JJ & Edwin: Your US ideas sound good to me. Clearly the US gov't. would see the "good" reasons to go to war, but as JJ mentioned the population lagged some (long) way behind. It would probably come down to the ability of Roosevelt to "lead" public opinion--and the kind of random events you suggest would likely be the keys.

(My original post used the words "might enter the war"--I agree it would not be a certain event. The US didn't even declare on Germany when Barbarossa started--as usually happens in SC. And there is still debate whether US would have declared on Germany after Pearl Harbor. Hitler saved the Allies a lot of headaches by taking the initiative!)

[santabear]

** DAMN COMPUTERS. SOMEONE PLS DELETE THIS DUPLICATE POSTING **

JJ & Edwin: Your US ideas sound good to me. Clearly the US gov't. would see the "good" reasons to go to war, but as JJ mentioned the population lagged some (long) way behind. It would probably come down to the ability of Roosevelt to "lead" public opinion--and the kind of random events you suggest would likely be the keys.

(My original post used the words "might enter the war"--I agree it would not be a certain event. The US didn't even declare on Germany when Barbarossa started--as usually happens in SC. And there is still debate whether US would have declared on Germany after Pearl Harbor. Hitler saved the Allies a lot of headaches by taking the initiative!)

[ April 14, 2003, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: santabear ]

[Iron Ranger]

Random events and DOW are nice and make each replay different. But in saying that there are three date dependant events that seam to be really out of wack. US readnes/DOW, USSR readness, Siberian transfer.

I don't want to get into a rant on this, expecialy now that v1.07 is out and they won't be changed. But how often, if ever, do these events take place anywhere near thier histrical time.

Quite often US enters in the early Fall of 41, not the winter of 41, even without the extra DOW by the Axis.

When do you ever see an axis attack on Russia before the late fall of 41 and sometimes as late as Feb 42.

The Siberian transfer never happens in the winter of 41, these troops were sent to the Moscow front for two reason. One, the Rising Sun Empire had attacked in the Pacific and the red spy system had notified Moscow that thier border was safe. Two the need for these high quality troops due to the german attack (this part the game does have right). But this event should be based solely on political events and not on the position of the german army.

EXP: If USA has entered the war, and USSR is an active power, and it is past Date X, then there should be a 90% chance of the transfer until the germans are with in 3 hexs of Moscow, the the odds increase to 100%.