• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

War Plan Red: Canada (and the UK) versus US

PoS

PoS

Minister of Love
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2014
Messages
33,824
Reaction score
26,571
Location
Oceania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red

The war plan outlined those actions that would be necessary if for any reason the U.S. and Britain went to war with each other. The plan assumed that the British would initially have the upper hand by virtue of the strength of the Royal Navy. The plan further assumed that Britain would probably use its base in Canada as a springboard from which to initiate an invasion of the United States. The assumption was taken that at first Britain would fight a defensive battle against invading American forces, but that the U.S. would eventually defeat the British by blockading Britain and cutting off its food supplies.
Click to expand...

So the plan was for US forces to strike north and occupy the main cities of Canada and it would cause the British to sue for peace.

What do you think, could America have beaten the UK in the early 1930s? :D
 
Japan was bleeding us pretty good till we nuked them. Nukes were a long way off in 1930. Red-Orange woulda been the end of us, IMO. We were a lot more vulnerable then than we are now. I think if they mounted a joint invasion, we would have been in trouble. If we were the aggressor, taking the fight to them, I think we'd had a shot.
 
KevinKohler said:
Japan was bleeding us pretty good till we nuked them. Nukes were a long way off in 1930. Red-Orange woulda been the end of us, IMO. We were a lot more vulnerable then than we are now. I think if they mounted a joint invasion, we would have been in trouble. If we were the aggressor, taking the fight to them, I think we'd had a shot.
Click to expand...

Japan was not "beating us pretty good until we nuked them." That's ridiculous.
 
1930?

With all the resources of the British Empire perhaps. But manpower would have been an issue for it. If the UK could not take over the northern industrial states in the first few months the US would eventually outproduce the UK and push back.
 
KevinKohler said:
Japan was bleeding us pretty good till we nuked them. Nukes were a long way off in 1930. Red-Orange woulda been the end of us, IMO. We were a lot more vulnerable then than we are now. I think if they mounted a joint invasion, we would have been in trouble. If we were the aggressor, taking the fight to them, I think we'd had a shot.
Click to expand...

Nah, Japan was on it's heels when we nuked them.
 
Harshaw said:
Japan was not "beating us pretty good until we nuked them." That's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Bleeding. Bleeding us. Our casualties were pretty high...as were there's. It's why we opted for nukes in the first place.
 
Without doing more research on military technology in the early thirties - I would say yes.
No way the UK could have successfully invaded the US. No way. The US would be able to occupy large Canadian cities - holding them for an extended period might have proved difficult.
You would have to considered guerrilla warfare, very effective tool. And social aspects, how would the US population had felt about such an invasion. Vietnam comes to mind.
As for taking Britain, that would have been difficult - its a long way to go to fight. Eventually, yes, I think the US would outproduce the Brits and wear them down but it would take some doing.
 
KevinKohler said:
But it would have been a fight to the death. They wouldn't have surrendered.
Click to expand...

Partially true, but their best fighting forces, equipment and ability to resupply had been all but annihilated by the time we would have ever invaded.
 
PoS said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red



So the plan was for US forces to strike north and occupy the main cities of Canada and it would cause the British to sue for peace.

What do you think, could America have beaten the UK in the early 1930s? :D
Click to expand...

Neither country was really all that interested in war with each other, contingency plans like that one aside. That being said, The United States most likely would have come out on top in Canada itself. What effect that would have on a wider treaty....
 
KevinKohler said:
Japan was bleeding us pretty good till we nuked them. Nukes were a long way off in 1930. Red-Orange woulda been the end of us, IMO. We were a lot more vulnerable then than we are now. I think if they mounted a joint invasion, we would have been in trouble. If we were the aggressor, taking the fight to them, I think we'd had a shot.
Click to expand...

Japan ran wild for a very short time, but by 1945 they had not managed to so much as slow our campaign. Was it bloody? Yes. Were we winning? Also yes.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Partially true, but their best fighting forces, equipment and ability to resupply had been all but annihilated by the time we would have ever invaded.
Click to expand...

Which wouldn't have stopped them from fighting on, especially if we hadn't used the nuclear weapons and invaded conventionally instead.

They were also planning to use Unit 731 bioweapons on San Francisco.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Which wouldn't have stopped them from fighting on, especially if we hadn't used the nuclear weapons and invaded conventionally instead.
Click to expand...

Sure, fighting on while getting absolutely slaughtered. That's not really in dispute.
They were also planning to use Unit 731 bioweapons on San Francisco.
Click to expand...

The logistics of doing that would have been, to say the least, daunting.
 
Last edited:
PoS said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red



So the plan was for US forces to strike north and occupy the main cities of Canada and it would cause the British to sue for peace.

What do you think, could America have beaten the UK in the early 1930s? :D
Click to expand...

Oh, we'da ****ed 'em up, what with broomsticks for rifles and jeeps covered in cardboard as tanks.....
 
Last edited:
Tanngrisnir said:
Sure, fighting on while getting absolutely slaughtered. That's not really in dispute.

The logistics of doing that would have been, to say the least, daunting.
Click to expand...

They did have an I-400 all kitted out and ready to go. It's certainly possible that such an attack could have been carried out.
 
To expand.

In 1930 I believe the British military was bigger than that of the US and I expect the British navy was superior at the time. Include the militaries of the rest of the British Empire and I expect the UK would have a 7 to 1 advantage in armed forces in 1930. So if the UK was the aggressor and was able to build up a large military force in Ontario and Quebec without causing the US to start a massive build up it could have invaded the industrial northern states and potentially hold them. A wildcard is how would the southern states react? Could they have been bought off by the British to give them freedom from Yankee oppression (I do not know how those states felt regarding the northern states in 1930).

If the UK could not build up a military force to invade those states Canada would fail eventually
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
To expand.

In 1930 I believe the British military was bigger than that of the US and I expect the British navy was superior at the time. Include the militaries of the rest of the British Empire and I expect the UK would have a 7 to 1 advantage in armed forces in 1930. So if the UK was the aggressor and was able to build up a large military force in Ontario and Quebec without causing the US to start a massive build up it could have invaded the industrial northern states and potentially hold them. A wildcard is how would the southern states react? Could they have been bought off by the British to give them freedom from Yankee oppression (I do not know how those states felt regarding the northern states in 1930).

If the UK could not build up a military force to invade those states Canada would fail eventually
Click to expand...

Well the British Army was certainly bigger than the US Army during that time, but not by much since they were spread out all over the place. If the UK were to come in, they would have to bring in lots of colonial troops as auxiliaries.

But one dimension y'all are forgetting about are the civilians on both sides. Ordinary Canucks and Americans were mostly farmers back then and they had guns, so it would have been fought between them. ;)
 
lol...they couldn't have beaten Canada, let alone the UK. Don't forget, we used to have a pretty boss military in those days. Certainly enough to hold off the American hordes until reinforcements arrived from the UK and her allies, a short hop across the Atlantic and down the St. Lawrence. The West would have been tougher to defend, but if America had attacked there, splitting it's forces, we would have simply taken over the Eastern Seaboard...which at the time would have been the juicier prize. Plus, pretty sure at that point Russia could have been convinced to help out England as well...Canada would have been smaller as a result, I'm sure, but it would be in Russian hands, not American.

Nah, I think you guys made the right call. :)
 
We Canadians are still a little sore at US Plan Red and Sub-plan Crimson. One US option seriously considered was to deny the British access to major Canadian transportation hubs like Winnipeg, Montreal, Toronto and especially Halifax. The plan was to bathe those Canadian cities in poison gas before American troops and Marines arrived to occupy what was left in order to deny Britain access to Canada. We in turn had our own war plans to proactively seize certain American cities and regions in the northern part of the Continental US (excluding Alaska) but our plan envisioned treating the US population humanely and only staying long enough to distract and delay US forces from invading Canada proper, until British Imperial reinforcements could arrive.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
PoS said:
So the plan was for US forces to strike north and occupy the main cities of Canada and it would cause the British to sue for peace.

What do you think, could America have beaten the UK in the early 1930s? :D
Click to expand...

Beaten the UK? Not likely. But they could have likely carved off big chunks of Canada (especially Western Canada) because of the long logistical lines, low local industrialization, and lack of capability to hold those areas.

KevinKohler said:
Japan was bleeding us pretty good till we nuked them. Nukes were a long way off in 1930. Red-Orange woulda been the end of us, IMO. We were a lot more vulnerable then than we are now. I think if they mounted a joint invasion, we would have been in trouble. If we were the aggressor, taking the fight to them, I think we'd had a shot.
Click to expand...

Well, Red-Orange was the plan for a possible alliance of Japan and the UK. Which by 1923 was already starting to crack with the withdrawal of the Uk-Japanese Alliance, dissatisfaction of Japan of the Washington Naval Treaty, and other issues.

And no, Japan was not "bleeding the US Dry". By late 1944 Japan was very much on the defensive on all fronts. And it was shrinking more and more rapidly as it's naval power shrank more and more.

Lord Tammerlain said:
In 1930 I believe the British military was bigger than that of the US and I expect the British navy was superior at the time. Include the militaries of the rest of the British Empire and I expect the UK would have a 7 to 1 advantage in armed forces in 1930.
Click to expand...

Yes it was larger. But it also had a considerably larger amount of land to protect.

At that time, it included Australia, New Zealand, India, Canada, and many more colonies (especially in Africa). Many of which had their own simmering Independence movements which would have prevented the UK from ever using it's full might against the US.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Partially true, but their best fighting forces, equipment and ability to resupply had been all but annihilated by the time we would have ever invaded.
Click to expand...


Not true at all. Please see Hell to Pay by D.M. Giangreco.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom