What would this war look like and what would the most likely outcome of been.
>>1071301
>war plan is a bunch of arrows
I don't think we can speculate much off of a very early plan
>>1071301
I have trouble even concieving how a early 20th century war between the U.S. and the UK would even come about; and it almost certainly wouldn't be a total war, because again, I just can't see anything provoking that kind of thing.
But as for how it would go, the U.S. is in an enormously advantaegous position. It would probably take 4-6 months to build up enough force to easily sweep into Canada, and while you'd probably see continuing resistance on the ice, the main urban belt would be occupied in fairly short order.
You'd also see a lot of Atlantic raiding. While the fleets are roughly even on paper, Britain is dependent on an enormous chain of imports from all over the world in a way that America isn't. Think of how much trouble they had against the u-boats in the two world wars, and now picture them scramling to defend against a fleet that guns evenly with their own. The notion of Britain starving, or at least having enormous shortages, is pretty easy to envision.
The U.S. doesn't really have corresponding vulnerabilities; so the only way I can see them losing is in a vietnamesque sense, of not being willing to prosecute the war and of paying the expenses involved in such an endeavor.
>>1071309
Well a hypothetical Anglo-American War in the 30's/40's
never mind the pic
>>1071301
To the American advantage, most of Canada's population/industry/transportation networks are rather close to the U.S. border
But beyond that, Canada is so expansive and sparsely populated (namely in the Western provinces) that a looong-term guerrilla war could be fought
While the notion of an Anglo-American War in the early 20th century seems insane, Canada formulated a counter-attack plan just in case
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_Scheme_No._1
Looks like the Americans would've gone north and also a little bit to the south.
>>1071377
>>1071313
>I have trouble even concieving how a early 20th century war between the U.S. and the UK would even come about
No wonder, it's a result of some exercise. You don't think officers only fuck their secretaries during peace time, don't you(they do fuck them, but they also work and this is the kind of work they do)?
>>1071313
>You'd also see a lot of Atlantic raiding. While the fleets are roughly even on paper, Britain is dependent on an enormous chain of imports from all over the world in a way that America isn't. Think of how much trouble they had against the u-boats in the two world wars, and now picture them scramling to defend against a fleet that guns evenly with their own. The notion of Britain starving, or at least having enormous shortages, is pretty easy to envision.
Not exactly. Major British routes went through Indian Ocean and Suez Channel and those two were out of reach of US Navy.
Also surface raiders were bigger pain in the ass than uboats.
>>1071405
Of course, but war is more than just a set of maneuvers and battles. It is, to quote Clausewitz, a fundamentally political exercise. You attempt to secure some kind of political objective by force of arms. How you conduct a war over a trade concession or a small strip of unimportant border territory is way different than how you conduct a national struggle for survival.
Without even a guess at an underlying political structure for the hypothetical war, it's almost impossible to come up with answer to questions like
>How aggressively will the two sides pursue it
>Will they be willing to raise war taxes and/or go hugely into debt over this conflict?
>How many men will they mobilize?
>What kind of internal resistance are they likely to face?
And I mean, these are fucking important questions. And because the war is so bizarre, so out there, it's hard to come up with answers.
>>1071301
>of been.
You lost me there son
>>1071422
Not even this anon. Some of these may have been made for peacetime promotion or by officers still in college.
Most of the times though it's a matter of securing yourself against everything that can possibly or impossibly happen and peacetime exercise for staffs.
>first enemy offensive/operation uzice
>second enemy offensive - operation sudost kroatien 1 2, operation ozren
>third enemy offensive - operation trio
>fourth enemy ofensive - operation weiss first phase
>fourth enemy offensive - operation weiss second phase
>fourth enemy offensive - battle of neretva partisan breaktrough
>fifth enemy offensive/operation schwarz - battle of sutjeska partisan breaktrough
post war maps
ww3: Just Fuck My Shit Up - Poland edition
>>1071788
idk, there battle plans no?
no ones posting any war plans, im just dumping what i got
any way...
>sixth enemy offensive
>seventh(and final) enemy offensive - operation rosselsprung - desant on drvar
and now im done
>>1071413
>>1071422
Halifax (East coast) and Esquimalt (West coast) were important potential naval repair and supply stations that would be open to the British in the event of war with the USA.
And Esquimalt, at the very southern tip of Vancouver Island, could restrict US naval and commerce going into or out of Seattle. Strait of Juan de Fuca is an important bottleneck.
Of course, Canada and US signed a (then) secret mutual defence treaty in the late 1930s to protect this waterway.
Can we get more battle plans up in this bitch? Can we make this a war plans thread?
There's nothing I love more than looking at military maps.
>>1071817
This isn't a war plan thread though. This is a hypothetical Anglo-Yank war thread
>>1071902
this
You only have to take southern Ontario, Montreal, and Vancouver; to have most of Canada's population and economy captured.
the rest of canada is sparsely populated nothing, frozen wasteland, and Alberta.
