What if American enters WW1 sooner?

>>3231604
Not to mention that America would probably expand its empire to Eurasia. I don't see how this would prevent Bolsheviks from remaining a growing force, however. I mean, in the USA, Debs managed his popularity within a socialist context in part because Roosevelt's progressivism was seen as too soft and fake.

>>3231604
>With Americans leading the charge, the Gallipoli campaign becomes a rapid success instead of quagmire.
Your entire train of thought hinges on this, yet what reason do you have to believe that it's true?

>>3231646

Because U.S. Marines wouldn't have been so stupid as to just sit around the beach, leaving essential high ground unoccupied during the opening days of the campaign while Turks have time to muster than forces. Americans would have immediately charged up those hills and occupied them before the Turkish army even got there.

>>3231604
Was the Ottoman Empire nearly this important?

>>3231671
So essentially, MUH MUHREENS

>>3231671
OORAH YUT SEMPER

>>3231680
militarily not really
but opening up the Dardanelles means that Russia would be able to sell her grain supplies,and the populace wouldn't be so angry at the Tsar

File: 134566-004-B88D6AA6.jpg (21KB, 338x450px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 338x450px

>>3231604
>only 9 Isonzos
DONT YOU DARE TEDDY

File: 469px-Turkish_Strait_disambig.svg[1].png (41KB, 469x388px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 469x388px

>>3231680

Yes. The Ottomans were the vulnerable under-belly of the Central Powers. Take them out, and suddenly Russia is able to start bringing in food and supplies through the Dardanelles. You could even send the American troops to fight on the Eastern Front this way, which would really weaken Germany's position in the east. Hell, with American troops fighting on both fronts, the war might even be over before the end of 1915, with reduces the number of Isonzos to just 4.

File: bad-generalship-luigi-cadorna_fb_951013.jpg (12KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 300x300px

>>3231713
I SAID STOP IT

>>3231697
>>3231727
>Don't do it, Luigi! I have the high ground!

>>Roosevelt declares war on the Central Powers during the December of 1914.
No. America was supportive of Germany until a few months before they entered the war under Woodrow Wilson

>>3232175

Roosevelt wouldn't have want to maintain neutrality and he wouldn't have sided with Germany after what happened in Belgium.

>>3232329
> Against neutrality
> Against invading Belgium
What the fuck was his problem?

>>3231604
This is one of the more interesting alt-history timelines that I hardly see brought up. It would have been fascinating to see Teddy's military philosophy enacted during the war. With American intervention, like you said, the USSR, and perhaps even Nazi Germany, may have never become a thing.

Beyond the war, the Bullmoose party had some very interesting core tenants as well. they were an blend of progressive domestic policy, proud American nationalism, and a very active foreign policy headlined by a strong military. they were in favor of things like women's suffrage, a national healthcare system, Social Security for the elderly, worker's rights, and were vehemently apposed to Washington lobbying, corrupt business practices, and businesses entering the political realm in general. If his proposals and laws were enacted, the courts would have likely become much weaker than they are today as well. One can't help but wonder what the US and the world would be like in this timeline. Would the war end sooner? would a second world war be completely avoided, at least as far as Europe is concerned? Would Roosevelt's aggressive foreign policy lead tot the US acquire Middle Eastern/African territory along with the French and British? What becomes of China if Mao never becomes inspired by the Soviets and Marx? What becomes of Istanbul/Constantinople is the Russian empire claims the territory and avoids a revolution? How would a far more progressive domestic policy work? There are so many what-ifs.

He might still have died of a broken heart if his sons get killed early on in the war.

>>3233065

Probably, but at least the Ottomans would have gotten BTFO and Christendom would have retaken Constantinople, preventing the Armenian genocide in the process.

File: IMG_3526.jpg (166KB, 679x1000px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 679x1000px

>>3232156
You underestimate my power
>>3232937
>>3234062
Why do people assume taking Istanbul is going to be a cakewalk,the Turks are going to fight tooth and tail for her and any annexation will be very shaky
Also even if it was taken theyre going think twice about giving it to the Russians

>>3234081

They would have had to give it to Russia. It was the promise that the entire Gallipoli offensive was based on.

>>3232329
Didn't know the president was a dictator. Who was congress?

>>3234100
>Have been trying for the longest time deny Russia access from warm sea port
>Gladly hand over one of the most strategic areas to them
What do they mean by this?

>>3234107

Roosevelt was a very persuasive man.

>>3234110

Mostly because the Entente was so terrified of Germany and they were depending on vigorous Russian engagement on the eastern front to weaken Germany and draw troops away from the Western front. Also, the ENTIRE point of the Gallipoli offensive was to open up the Dardanelles and strengthen Russia's position. If Britain were still worried about Russia getting Constantinople, then they never would have launched the offensive in the first place, because basically the entire campaign was for Russia's benefit.

Good thread.

>>3234100
No it wasn't. The premise of Gallipoli was to clear the Dardanells, shell Istanbul, and hopefully force the OE out of the war. There was no part of it about giving Istanbul to the Russians.

>>3236316

>There was no part of it about giving Istanbul to the Russians.

That's completely and utterly wrong but okay.

>>3236331
>That's completely and utterly wrong but okay.
Please, show me some sort of contemporary document where ANYONE in the British empire talks about giving the city over to the Russians once they've hopefully knocked out the Ottomans.

>>3234107
Roosevelt was a fucking dictator that's why they made 2 term limits after he died.

>>3236358
This is the first Roosevelt we're talking about, you numbnut.

>>3236349
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constantinople_Agreement

>>3236358

Wrong Roosevelt. Teddy only got 1 term unfortunately. He got bored of being President and went off to Africa to shoot lions and shit. Then when he got back, he suddenly wanted to be president again, and he ran in 1912, but didn't win.

>>3236349

The World Undone by G.J. Meyer makes it very clear that Russia was to obtain Constantinople after the Ottomans were defeated. This is the best book on WW1, so I feel very proud to be citing it.