America's planned invasion of the British Empire in the 1930's.

I found an interesting video on youtube about "Code Plan Red" where the United States was preparing for a possible invasion of Canada and British dominions in the Atlantic and Pacific. Kinda long but worth watching.

haha in the 1930s no way ! our navy was too big our empire was even bigger although I think you could of got Canada couldve been taken and the mediterranean but a actual land invasion of the British homeland would be impossible at the time

new york would've been a easy target for RN destroyers : )

if america wanted to get rid of us during ww2 would have made more sense

And cue the "husband and wife" arguments between the British and America lads.



EDIT: Didn't look at it all, but I will eventually.

Just shows how America is just as worse as Germany during the war back then.


I still love how Hitler would side with Britain tho...

Didn't watch the video but I read about that on Cracked.com. The only reason they planned it was the british king of that time was apparently pro nazi and so was his wife. So this was planned invasion was just incase Britain decided to ally with Nazi germany.

Teckno wrote:

Didn't watch the video but I read about that on Cracked.com. The only reason they planned it was the british king of that time was apparently pro nazi and so was his wife. So this was planned invasion was just incase Britain decided to ally with Nazi germany.

I doubt it was just that. As the video showed some high ranking military officers supported the nazi's..

I watched the very same documentry about War Plan Red on channel 5 about a year ago, it was very interesting.

Teckno wrote:

Didn't watch the video but I read about that on Cracked.com. The only reason they planned it was the british king of that time was apparently pro nazi and so was his wife. So this was planned invasion was just incase Britain decided to ally with Nazi germany.

I think you'll find Edward VIII was seen as more of a Nazi 'appeaser' as he was terrified of the concept of having another conflict with Germany so soon after WWI where close to a million British soldiers died. Also Edward VIII was only on the throne for less than a year in 1936 before he abdicated, which was after War Plan Red's original draft.

War Plan Red was devised because American planners believed that Britain’s imperial expansion and reach would eventually bring it into conflict with the U.S. so the Americans drew up plans for a preemptive strike against the British Empire, in particular Canada. However as the British Empire didn't expand after 1918 the war plan was never implemented and WWII diverted all remaining attention away from the possibility of this conflict.

Also if America was so worried about Nazi Germany then how come you guys were only capable of half a job during WWII?

^
probably because the Americans were reassured that Britain was on their side when they declared war on Germany.

Dam_Noir wrote:

I watched the very same documentry about War Plan Red on channel 5 about a year ago, it was very interesting.

Teckno wrote:

Didn't watch the video but I read about that on Cracked.com. The only reason they planned it was the british king of that time was apparently pro nazi and so was his wife. So this was planned invasion was just incase Britain decided to ally with Nazi germany.

I think you'll find Edward VIII was seen as more of a Nazi 'appeaser' as he was terrified of the concept of having another conflict with Germany so soon after WWI where close to a million British soldiers died. Also Edward VIII was only on the throne for less than a year in 1936 before he abdicated, which was after War Plan Red's original draft.

War Plan Red was devised because American planners believed that Britain’s imperial expansion and reach would eventually bring it into conflict with the U.S. so the Americans drew up plans for a preemptive strike against the British Empire, in particular Canada. However as the British Empire didn't expand after 1918 the war plan was never implemented and WWII diverted all remaining attention away from the possibility of this conflict.

Also if America was so worried about Nazi Germany then how come you guys were only capable of half a job during WWII?

Edward VIII went on a vacation to Germany after his abdication so I'm pretty sure he was more than a "Nazi appeaser". Also I don't get the last part. Half a job? You mean Japan?

^ Me thinks he's talking about coming into Europe late.

Teckno wrote:

^ Me thinks he's talking about coming into Europe late.

Yeah I had a feeling that was it. Damn Europeans pretend like the Pacific Theater didn't exist.

Stigma wrote:

Teckno wrote:

^ Me thinks he's talking about coming into Europe late.

Yeah I had a feeling that was it. Damn Europeans pretend like the Pacific Theater didn't exist.

Do we now? Well I can't speak for the entire continent in which you assume all the countries are the same but I can speak for Britain.

We led the efforts against the Japanese forces in the South-East Asian Theatre.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South-East_Asian_theatre_of_World_War_II

We also supported the U.S. efforts in the Pacific Theatre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Pacific_Fleet

Teckno wrote:

^
probably because the Americans were reassured that Britain was on their side when they declared war on Germany.

Comment of the year right there!

How much more of a reassurance would America need considering we declared war on Nazi Germany in 1939 over two years earlier!?

Stigma wrote:

Teckno wrote:

^ Me thinks he's talking about coming into Europe late.

Yeah I had a feeling that was it. Damn Europeans pretend like the Pacific Theater didn't exist.

American ignorance right there...

Dam_Noir wrote:

Stigma wrote:

Teckno wrote:

^ Me thinks he's talking about coming into Europe late.

Yeah I had a feeling that was it. Damn Europeans pretend like the Pacific Theater didn't exist.

Do we now? Well I can't speak for the entire continent in which you assume all the countries are the same but I can speak for Britain.

We led the efforts against the Japanese forces in the South-East Asian Theatre.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South-East_Asian_theatre_of_World_War_II

We also supported the U.S. efforts in the Pacific Theatre

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Pacific_Fleet

I said Pacific theater, I'm well aware the British were defended their South-East Asian Dominions. The BPF was some short skirmishes with Japan in the Indian Ocean but left in 1942 and didn't return until the end of 1944 when the US was already kicking Japan's ass. I'm not sure if you read the BPF article because it does not shed a good light on the BPF. It says there that it was not vital to the war and was dwarfed by the forces and military action the US Navy had in the first paragraph of the "Background". Even in the next couple paragraphs it says that the main reason the BPF was deployed was for political reasons as the US was liberating British territories and extending its influence. In the fleet logistics it even sounds like the BPF was merely a burden specifically this part.

Quote :

The Australian government agreed to contribute to the support of the BPF but the Australian economy was fully committed to the war effort and manpower and stores for the BPF could only come from taking them from American and Australian forces fighting the Japanese.[10] Unfortunately, Admiral Sir Bruce Fraser arrived in Sydney on 10 December 1944 under the mistaken impression that Australia had asked for the BPF and promised to provide for its needs. Two days later, the Acting Prime Minister of Australia Frank Forde announced the allocation of £21,156,500 for the maintenance of the BPF. In January 1945, General of the Army Douglas MacArthur agreed to release American stockpiles in Australia to support the BPF. The Australian government soon became concerned at the voracious demands of the BPF works programme, which was criticised by Australian military leaders. In April 1945, Fraser publicly criticised the Australian government's handling of waterside industrial disputes that were holding up British ships. The government was shocked and angered but agreed to allocate £6,562,500 for BPF naval works. Fraser was not satisfied.

I wasn't criticizing the Europeans or British, merely pointing out how you guys always undermine the significance the US had during World War 2. In part because Brits always talk as if Nazi Germany was the only enemy during World War 2.

Stigma wrote:

I said Pacific theater, I'm well aware the British were defended their South-East Asian Dominions. The BPF was some short skirmishes with Japan in the Indian Ocean but left in 1942 and didn't return until the end of 1944 when the US was already kicking Japan's ass. I'm not sure if you read the BPF article because it does not shed a good light on the BPF. It says there that it was not vital to the war and was dwarfed by the forces and military action the US Navy had in the first paragraph of the "Background". Even in the next couple paragraphs it says that the main reason the BPF was deployed was for political reasons as the US was liberating British territories and extending its influence. In the fleet logistics it even sounds like the BPF was merely a burden specifically this part.

I wasn't criticizing the Europeans or British, merely pointing out how you guys always undermine the significance the US had during World War 2. In part because Brits always talk as if Nazi Germany was the only enemy during World War 2.

Of course our presence was nowhere near as strong as the U.S in the Pacific theatre, our combined forces were assigned as such so that the U.S. would primarily take care of the Japanese presence in the Pacific. (seen as the attack on Pearl Harbour was staged from this area and the obvious strategic advantages it gave the U.S. for the remainder of the war)

Just as the location of British India meant the British forces would primarily stage their operations against the Japanese in south east Asia whereas the U.S. had little presence in this theatre in comparison to their British counterparts.

But I certainly wouldn't criticise the U.S. efforts in south east Asia seen as we were working as Allies and we planned the deployment of our forces accordingly. For example in the European theatre the location of the Aliied countries meant that the British and U.S. operations were staged in the Western front and the Soviets were staged in the Eastern Front.

I wasn't trying to undermine the significance the U.S. had during WWII, I was originally replying to Teckno regards his claim that War Plan Red was written because of Edward VIII's disposition towards the Nazi's. I was just making a point that War Plan Red was written before Edward VIII's very short reign and if America was so bothered about the threat of Nazi Germany then they would of declared war on them in 1939 when we did, that's all.

It wasn't my claim. I said I read it from Cracked.com. Obviously not the most trustworthy source, but I was just adding to the discussion with it.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18722_5-unfought-wars-that-would-have-changed-everything.html


While Anglo-American relations may seem awesome now thanks to J. K. Rowling, Monty Python and Shaun of the Dead, the fact remains that the U.S. and UK spent a lot of time trying to kill each other before settling on their common interests. War Plan Red was America's playbook for a worst-case military scenario with the entire United Kingdom: Britain, India, Canada, anywhere that flew the Union Jack.

War Plan Red. The choice of "Emerald" for Ireland is evidence that war planners might be the least imaginative people on the planet.
By 1902, the U.S. had already fought two wars with England and nearly fought a third one in 1896. So when the UK established an alliance with our not-friends Japan, the U.S. government got a little jumpy. Things cooled off after WWI, but the U.S. Secretary of War and the Secretary of Navy nevertheless approved War Plan Red as late as 1930. Nobody thought we would ever use it until something kind of scary happened in 1937... there were rumors that King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom was pro-Nazi.

Naaaaaah.
What Stopped It:
A little WTF moment in history called the abdication crisis. On December 11, 1936, Edward VIII shocked the planet when he resigned as King-Emperor of the British Empire to marry a twice-divorced desperate housewife named Wallis Simpson. Who was Wallis Simpson? A woman who Hitler himself thought "would have made a good Queen."

And she felt the Nazis were "rather dapper blokes."
While the king wasn't exactly in a position of great authority over his country to begin with, he was perfectly capable of leaking Allied secrets to his German buddies. Which, by the way, is something historians suspect he and Wallis did once the war started and the UK was firmly in the anti-Nazi camp. Edward was still a nightmare for the Brits, but fortunately he was no longer in power.
If The War Had Happened...
Say hi to the new United States of America.

Courtesy of John Candy and friends.
The War Department recognized that Canada was the British Empire's best route to strike deep into the American continent, so War Plan Red dictated that the U.S. would launch a full invasion against Canada via Vermont, North Dakota and the Midwest. The playbook even included such delectable pointers as how "the best practicable route to Vancouver is via Route 99."

"Soon, men, we will have enough Maple syrup to sate America's great hunger."
With the Great Lakes a war-zone and Canada's Pacific and Atlantic coasts blockaded by the U.S. Navy, War Plan Red would have ended in nothing short of Canada's utter surrender to the United States of America. Worst case scenario: the United States gets Quebec. Best case: the whole plate of pancakes plus whatever islands in the Pacific, Atlantic and Caribbean we considered a threat to America's newfound superpower status.

Teckno wrote:

It wasn't my claim. I said I read it from Cracked.com. Obviously not the most trustworthy source, but I was just adding to the discussion with it.

Enough said really, but naturally if the information is false then it's hardly surprising if somebody corrects you.