What could plausibly cause Germany to launch & persist with USW & send Zimmerman telegram much earlier?

raharris1973 · May 24, 2023

What could plausibly cause Germany to launch & persist with USW (unrestricted submarine warfare) & send Zimmerman telegram much earlier?

Might the Germans have almost randomly or whimsically chosen to adopt their Feb 1, 1917 rules of engagement for submarines - no restrictions, free for all against all shipping, including neutrals, 6 months, a year, 18 months, 2 years earlier? Resulting in multiple successive sinkinngs of American merchant and passenger ships?
As an adjunct of such a policy shift, might the Germans have anticpated a possible US declaration of war and sent an equivalent to the Zimmerman Telegram, offering Mexico an alliance in return for attacking (and distracting) the US?

If something more than whimsy or random brainstorming among German wartime leadership is needed, what else could qualify as a plausible sufficient cause for such a decision?

Having another dozen or two dozen U-Boats on hand earlier to make an unrestricted campaign seem more worth the risk at an earlier point in time?

Having Britain and other Entente powers use more dirty tricks and tactics that exploit vulnerabilities submarines are exposed to when they follow more restrictive cruiser or identification rules, causing a rash of sub sinkings and captures?

Having pro-Unrestricted Submarine Warfare guys (like Ludendorff & Hindenburg) in charge earlier instead of guys who werent's (like Falkenhayn) for whatever objective/subjective reason - personal scandal, earlier bad news on the ground fronts in 1916 (Verdun or Romania or Somme)?

More desperation about the war in general leading to desperate searcb for silver bullet tactics?

Significantly worse surface fleet defeat leaving the Navy with less to do, less hope for the surface fleet to contribute anything?

America showing greater hostility - so it seems nothing to lose?

America protesting only mildly over early submarine incidents, or passing ....-McLemore foreign travel ban - making it seem America would back away from danger?

Germany winning on the ground fronts but unable to reach Britain, so submarines seem the only practical tool?

Basically, would most or all plausible paths to earlier unrestricted submarine warfare adoption come from Germany doing worse in the war, or might some come from Germany doing better in the war?

EmperorPenguin · May 24, 2023

Interesting question. The decision rests with the Kaiser alone so we must change his thinking. He certainly was in a sour mood especially when Romania joined the war so that's possible- we need to fight now no matter what

A more interesting recalculation would be that the Germans anticipate that Wilson won't fight until after the 1916 election. His whole campaign is he kept us out of war, Therefore, he won't actually declare war until the voting is over. War was not popular, USW went on for a long time before Wilson asked for the DOW and there were many dissensions.

So let's say the Germans declare USW effective like August 1, 1916. Its close enough that Wilson will hesitate to declare war before November. The Germans might hope by then, the Americans had grown used to the idea and would accept it. It might work. I'm not that versed in the 1916 election to answer it but we have to remember how opposed to war America was.

The vote was:

82-6 with 8 abstentions in the Senate
373-50 with 8 abstentions in the House

The draft had an effective 30% refusal rate.

I suppose Zimmerman might be an ..... and still send his telegram and an even bigger ..... and admit to it. If he isn't, the chances of war go way down. I really can't understand what he was thinking.

This is also before the Russian Revolution. The Tsarist regime was very unpopular with Americans (especially Jewish Americans for obvious reasons). The overthrowing of the Tsar and Zimmerman telegrams play significant roles in getting America into the war.

In any event, this would make USW a definitive issue in American electoral politics and the pro war faction would need to make their case directly to the voters

raharris1973 · May 24, 2023

this is good food for thought

Chlodio · May 25, 2023

If Germany was more serious about the blockade of Britain, refused to back down after sinking the Lusitania, and kept right on ignoring cruiser rules and sinking ships in the Atlantic, even American ones, then I could see the US declaring war in 1915 with or without a Zimmerman telegram. Perhaps the biggest advocate of American neutrality was Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan, but he resigned in June 1915 after the Lusitania sinking that May.

delta1 · May 25, 2023

Returning to unrestricted submarine warfare in 1917 was really an act of desperation. The blockade was beginning to seriously impair the war effort and the German High Command knew that it was running out of time.

I can't see a situation in which they would undertake a course of action that was bound to bring the United States into the war until they reached that level of desperation.

raharris1973 · May 25, 2023

Chlodio said:
If Germany was more serious about the blockade of Britain, refused to back down after sinking the Lusitania, and kept right on ignoring cruiser rules and sinking ships in the Atlantic, even American ones,

What would be some of the more probable ways to make the Germans more serious about submarine blockade at this stage. I've offered a buffet menu.

Chlodio said:
If Germany was more serious about the blockade of Britain, refused to back down after sinking the Lusitania, and kept right on ignoring cruiser rules and sinking ships in the Atlantic, even American ones, then I could see the US declaring war in 1915 with or without a Zimmerman telegram.

In principle I agree. I think it would at a minimum still take several months to play out, and require a period of time with the sinking of several consecutive American ships and fatalities in attacks sequenced in fairly close succession but going on a long-time to keep the tension alive and building. I say this because after Lusitania, there were multiple rounds of letters exchanged and even a few more sinkings over a six month period before the Germans made specific pledges conceding that they would follow certain rules as a matter of policy, and in that time (in 1916), hardly any US ships were sunk and the US wasn't quite at at the brink with a big clamor in Congress for war.

........And, even if breaking off diplomatic relations much earlier.....and declaring war earlier, this does not necessarily mean that the timeline of AEF deployment to the European battlefield is automatically moved up an equal amount, or that one is even deployed at all, because the US would be starting from a lower point of readiness, and ground combat wasn't foreordained as a mandatory part of US strategy. The US Navy of course, would have engaged against German subs from day 1 of any war, and the US would have employed its full economic might against Germany however.

EmperorPenguin said:
A more interesting recalculation would be that the Germans anticipate that Wilson won't fight until after the 1916 election. His whole campaign is he kept us out of war, Therefore, he won't actually declare war until the voting is over. War was not popular, USW went on for a long time before Wilson asked for the DOW and there were many dissensions.

So let's say the Germans declare USW effective like August 1, 1916. Its close enough that Wilson will hesitate to declare war before November. The Germans might hope by then, the Americans had grown used to the idea and would accept it. It might work. I'm not that versed in the 1916 election to answer it but we have to remember how opposed to war America was.

This is a very interesting idea.

I would also note that the US was much less ready. It was busily engaged with the Villa Expedition,and had not yet absorbed the lessons from it in terms of large scale troop mobilization and handling.

pugsville · May 25, 2023

raharris1973 said:
What would be some of the more probable ways to make the Germans more serious about submarine blockade at this stage. I've offered a buffet menu.

In principle I agree. I think it would at a minimum still take several months to play out, and require a period of time with the sinking of several consecutive American ships and fatalities in attacks sequenced in fairly close succession but going on a long-time to keep the tension alive and building. I say this because after Lusitania, there were multiple rounds of letters exchanged and even a few more sinkings over a six month period before the Germans made specific pledges conceding that they would follow certain rules as a matter of policy, and in that time (in 1916), hardly any US ships were sunk and the US wasn't quite at at the brink with a big clamor in Congress for war.

........And, even if breaking off diplomatic relations much earlier.....and declaring war earlier, this does not necessarily mean that the timeline of AEF deployment to the European battlefield is automatically moved up an equal amount, or that one is even deployed at all, because the US would be starting from a lower point of readiness, and ground combat wasn't foreordained as a mandatory part of US strategy. The US Navy of course, would have engaged against German subs from day 1 of any war, and the US would have employed its full economic might against Germany however.

I donlt agree that the US would be starting form the lower readiness as the peperataios of the US army before declaration of war were all basically abandoned as useless. So the extra time in declaring war latter would have had limted effect as the preperations during peace were rubbish.

raharris1973 said:
This is a very interesting idea.

I would also note that the US was much less ready. It was busily engaged with the Villa Expedition,and had not yet absorbed the lessons from it in terms of large scale troop mobilization and handling.

I fnd it hard to believe they had learnt anything form the Villa Expedition In prepearing the AEF if there was a mistake to be made, they made it.

Chlodio · May 25, 2023

raharris1973 said:
....and declaring war earlier, this does not necessarily mean that the timeline of AEF deployment to the European battlefield is automatically moved up an equal amount, or that one is even deployed at all, because the US would be starting from a lower point of readiness, and ground combat wasn't foreordained as a mandatory part of US strategy.

The US Army expanded very little between 1914 and 1917 (from 98k to 127k) and was still unprepared for war in 1917. The US isn't giving up much by declaring war early. The real expansion comes after the declaration of war, whenever that happens. I think if the US did declare war late in 1915 they could have a full army (12 divisions) in France by early 1917 with a second army deployed in France by September 1917, a full year ahead of OTL.

raharris1973 said:
What would be some of the more probable ways to make the Germans more serious about submarine blockade at this stage. I've offered a buffet menu.

If the Germans felt the same way in WW1 as they did in WW2 that the only way to defeat Britain was by submarine blockade. I haven't looked at the number of WW1 U-boats and how those numbers compare to WW2. I assume there would be some issues with not having enough U-boats available in 1915 to make a serious effort at blockade, but the Germans might still try. It would get easier for the Germans if they captured some French ports early in the war. The Germans were obviously thinking of something when they sank the Lusitania. All they have to do is keep thinking that way and not respond to American protests about unrestricted submarine warfare. Maybe if Bryan was more successful at getting his views across that Germany was within its rights with the Lusitania. That would encourage Germany to keep sinking merchant ships. When Bryan resigned it told the Germans that Wilson was serious about pressing American rights to freedom of the seas. If Bryan stays in the administration it tells the Germans that America will not press its rights and will instead honor Germany's blockade of Britain and France.

raharris1973 · May 25, 2023

Chlodio said:
I think if the US did declare war late in 1915 they could have a full army (12 divisions) in France by early 1917 with a second army deployed in France by September 1917, a full year ahead of OTL.

sounds perfectly plausible to me!

Chlodio said:
Maybe if Bryan was more successful at getting his views across that Germany was within its rights with the Lusitania. That would encourage Germany to keep sinking merchant ships. When Bryan resigned it told the Germans that Wilson was serious about pressing American rights to freedom of the seas. If Bryan stays in the administration it tells the Germans that America will not press its rights and will instead honor Germany's blockade of Britain and France.

Hmm, the Germans could be 'led on' by a softer American response. Interesting idea!

RandomRodent · May 25, 2023

Chlodio said:
The US Army expanded very little between 1914 and 1917 (from 98k to 127k) and was still unprepared for war in 1917. The US isn't giving up much by declaring war early. The real expansion comes after the declaration of war, whenever that happens. I think if the US did declare war late in 1915 they could have a full army (12 divisions) in France by early 1917 with a second army deployed in France by September 1917, a full year ahead of OTL.

This is one of those statements that needs more context. The Regular Army did not expand very much but the war making capacity did. For example the US intended by 1917 to be able to field an army of 1 million men (regular Army, National Guard plus volunteers or draftees). Now in the context of the war in Europe those were rooky numbers. However by entry into World War 2 the US could draw upon British paid for factories for rifles, the Model 1917 could be mass produced when efforts to supply Springfield 1903s proved disappointing and draw upon British and French surplus for artillery and aircraft and tanks.

Given what we know your deployment schedule does not sound unreasonable but it is unfair to characterise the US as not preparing for war mobilisation.

Michele A · May 26, 2023

raharris1973 said:
What could plausibly cause Germany to launch & persist with USW (unrestricted submarine warfare) & send Zimmerman telegram much earlier?

...

If something more than whimsy or random brainstorming among German wartime leadership is needed, what else could qualify as a plausible sufficient cause for such a decision?

The war going worse for them in the very first months, with the Anglo-French receiving more stuff from across the Atlantic.

Either an assumption that the USA will not enter the war no matter what, or exactly the opposite: that the USA will soon enter the war against the Central Powers, so it makes no sense to try and assuage them.

pugsville · May 26, 2023

Chlodio said:
The US Army expanded very little between 1914 and 1917 (from 98k to 127k) and was still unprepared for war in 1917. The US isn't giving up much by declaring war early. The real expansion comes after the declaration of war, whenever that happens. I think if the US did declare war late in 1915 they could have a full army (12 divisions) in France by early 1917 with a second army deployed in France by September 1917, a full year ahead of OTL.

The slow deployment in part political was the AEF wanted to arrive in frce and as a separate force.

RandomRodent said:
This is one of those statements that needs more context. The Regular Army did not expand very much but the war making capacity did. For example the US intended by 1917 to be able to field an army of 1 million men (regular Army, National Guard plus volunteers or draftees). Now in the context of the war in Europe those were rooky numbers. However by entry into World War 2 the US could draw upon British paid for factories for rifles, the Model 1917 could be mass produced when efforts to supply Springfield 1903s proved disappointing and draw upon British and French surplus for artillery and aircraft and tanks.

British & French Artillery, aircraft, tanks, machine guns were not "surplus"

RandomRodent said:
Given what we know your deployment schedule does not sound unreasonable but it is unfair to characterise the US as not preparing for war mobilisation.

Oh they prepared, just generally very badly. Some of it was poor planning and half measures some of it was just producing wepaons on alarge scale is hard and takes a while,

Search

Search

What could plausibly cause Germany to launch & persist with USW & send Zimmerman telegram much earlier?

raharris1973

EmperorPenguin

raharris1973

Chlodio

delta1

raharris1973

pugsville

Chlodio

raharris1973

RandomRodent

Michele A

pugsville

More History Discussions

Recent History Discussions

Trending History Discussions