Would the world be a better place if the USA didn't exist?

[Carabas]

Without the USA, do you think we would have had a true nuclear war yet?

Would we have nukes to have a nuclear war with?

[DrNewGod]

Would we have nukes to have a nuclear war with?

The science had been done (a lot of it in Europe). Humans being human, some moron was going to try it.

[KNIGHT OF THE LAKE]

That's true. It's like, they were having troubles in Vietnam...and we came over and just slaughtered the hell out of them, civilians and all.

I’d probably put Vietnam, getting involved with Iran, and the Iraq war as the three top military misteps in US history. Look I’m not saying it’s all good. I’m just saying that’s what happens when a country becomes the predominant military force in the world and historically that goes back to ancient times. The thing is if not us, it’s someone else, and in this era, the options weren’t great. Like how many other works powers would have ever joined something like NATO or the UN? No they just wanted to slaughter and conquer.

[ZombieHavoc]

I’d probably put Vietnam, getting involved with Iran, and the Iraq war as the three top military misteps in US history. Look I’m not saying it’s all good. I’m just saying that’s what happens when a country becomes the predominant military force in the world and historically that goes back to ancient times. The thing is if not us, it’s someone else, and in this era, the options weren’t great. Like how many other works powers would have ever joined something like NATO or the UN? No they just wanted to slaughter and conquer.

That's true again. Maybe what bothers me almost as much as the war crimes is that we're all supposed to not only accept it but approve of it because of said American Exceptionalism.

I guess that's why this country probably deserves the current administration.

[Zero Hunter]

Lol. If the US didn’t exist you’d have the European dominated west and all their colonialism going uncheckedZ then around WWII you’d have Germany’s influence lasting longer. Then assuming the war (which would be worse) has a similar result you are looking at Russia who had no problem using and meddling in other countries being in the same spot.

Not only that but without the US Germany probably would have had more time to get their rocket program finished and they would have started carpet bombing every city in range. They would have leveled London, Paris, and probably Moscow.

[Coin Biter]

We wouldn't be on this website, discussing North American comics, that's for sure

By this stage, the existence of the US is such a vast and pervasive fact that imagining its exclusion, and in particular whether the world would be better at worse... is impossible.

US governance and public values do, however, seem to be changing and are no longer as influential as they once were.

It may be premature to think of the decline of US power and influence in this world - much the same things as are now said about China were said in the 90s in relation to Japan eclipsing the US and they failed to emerge. However, Fukuyama's theory on the end of history and the triumph of liberal democracies, controversial enough at the time, would seem like outright lunacy now.

[Hiromi]

The Russians would disagree.

Without a Western and African front Russia get's to face the full force of the Axis military without all that material the US provided it via lend lease*, so they can disagree all they want, they're still wrong

*America supplied the Soviets with over 11 billion dollars worth of material including
boots, uniforms material, rubber for their tires, all of their aluminum, 1/3 of their munitions, over 500,000 trucks/jeeps (Russia only produced about 200,000 of their own through the war), over 12,000 armored vehicles including 7,000 tanks(a big part of the Soviet armored push was made up of 4,000 upgunned Sherman tanks), 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, nearly 18,000 aircraft (Aerocobras, P40s, C-47s, and A20s), telephone wire and equipment, 2,000 locomotives(they only produced 92 of their own), over 11,000 various train cars, and ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) that amounted to 53 percent of their total domestic production, and last but not least 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products including all of the Soviet's first class aviation fuel

[DrNewGod]

Not only that but without the US Germany probably would have had more time to get their rocket program finished and they would have started carpet bombing every city in range. They would have leveled London, Paris, and probably Moscow.

Von Braun himself stated that the Nazi's didn't really hand him a blank check until the Luftwaffe was nearly swept from the skies, and unable to hold back the US 8th Air Force and RAF Bomber Command. The Wehrmacht was visionary with their tanks, but not so much with other weapons.

[mr_crisp]

Of course it would. The United States is the source of the world's problems.

[wjowski]

Europe would end up burning down the world a third time.

[DrNewGod]

The Russians would disagree.

Without a Western and African front Russia get's to face the full force of the Axis military without all that material the US provided it via lend lease*, so they can disagree all they want, they're still wrong

*America supplied the Soviets with over 11 billion dollars worth of material including
boots, uniforms material, rubber for their tires, all of their aluminum, 1/3 of their munitions, over 500,000 trucks/jeeps (Russia only produced about 200,000 of their own through the war), over 12,000 armored vehicles including 7,000 tanks(a big part of the Soviet armored push was made up of 4,000 upgunned Sherman tanks), 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, nearly 18,000 aircraft (Aerocobras, P40s, C-47s, and A20s), telephone wire and equipment, 2,000 locomotives(they only produced 92 of their own), over 11,000 various train cars, and ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) that amounted to 53 percent of their total domestic production, and last but not least 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products including all of the Soviet's first class aviation fuel

Definitely would have cost them more, they might even indeed have lost, but there's no underestimating that mean ole Russian Winter. As for Africa, the British carried the bulk of that; we mainly spent a year figuring out how not to get caught in Panzer tank treads. One school of thought holds that the real damage to the Axis was all inflicted in 1942, when we were still figuring out how to fight them.

My smartmouthery aside, the US role was unquestionably significant, but the "Two Time World War Champions" mentality is simply incorrect. But then if we're talking about there being no USA, the chain of events might have included Great Britain, and perhaps also France, owning considerable colonies in North America, and all the continent's resources getting poured into the WWI Allied Powers from 1914, and there simply being no Third Reich between 1933-1945, but an occupied Germany.

[Hiromi]

Not only that but without the US Germany probably would have had more time to get their rocket program finished and they would have started carpet bombing every city in range. They would have leveled London, Paris, and probably Moscow.

Thing is without the US the Germans might not need the rocket program, V2s were primarily for Britain, and how long does Britain hold out without the US. First there's the lend lease again, second there's Churchill's entire strategy of drawing the US into open war with Germany, what's left if that isn't there?

V2's cost roughly the same in material and manpower as 3.5 fighters, and they launched over 3,000 of them, that's a lot of material that can be allocated elsewhere

There's other what if's like that, Uboats were primarily for the Atlantic and Western navies, each one cost 5 million marks, and the Germans built over a 1,000, imagine what else could have been done with that if not for the War of the Atlantic?

Definitely would have cost them more, they might even indeed have lost, but there's no underestimating that mean ole Russian Winter. As for Africa, the British carried the bulk of that; we mainly spent a year figuring out how not to get caught in Panzer tank treads. One school of thought holds that the real damage to the Axis was all inflicted in 1942, when we were still figuring out how to fight them.

My smartmouthery aside, the US role was unquestionably significant, but the "Two Time World War Champions" mentality is simply incorrect. But then if we're talking about there being no USA, the chain of events might have included Great Britain, and perhaps also France, owning considerable colonies in North America, and all the continent's resources getting poured into the WWI Allied Powers from 1914, and there simply being no Third Reich between 1933-1945, but an occupied Germany.

Without the US the Red Army would have starved, and I have a hard time seeing how a force that already took 20 million casualties could have taken substantial loses on top of that. It's not just the lose of guns and bullets, Russia's entire infrastructure and logistics suffers substantially without it. Russia only faced about half of the Wehrmacht's military. The African front falls if the British Isles fall or surrender, which is much more likely without the prospect of American direct and indirect intervention

Rommel's Afrika corps and 30+German ground divisions stationed in France awaiting the American/British invasion would have made quite the difference if they were in the Don Bend in the Fall of 42 defending Stalingrad against an army with no food, no ammunition, no fuel, and barely even uniforms to wear

400,000 good troops stationed in Norway could have reinforced the Army Group North in taking Leningrad

30+divisions fighting in Italy and the Balkans could have attacked Russia from the South

How does Germany fare without the 20,000 heavy bombers deployed against it by the Brits and Americans? Because Russia never developed one, how does the Russian air force fair if it's numbers are reduced by about 1/5th and gets to fly against the German defenses now bolstered by the 10,000 heavy caliber AA guns that no longer have to defend it's western borders? How does the Luftwaffe fare when it doesn't have half it's forces tied up west where it took 75% of it's total loses?

Remove America from the War and Britain falls first, and Russia sometime later, it's hard to argue against that. As for further time travel complications I don't feel like getting into that headache as it gets more and more convoluted the further back you go

I will say this without America in WW1 it goes on longer and it probably results in an eventual shaky truce with most countries retaining their territory and power, and with current leadership and mentalities of Empire building and alliance chains in place, meaning that they likely do the exact same thing again at some point in the future, one of the reasons Europe was reluctant to engage with Germany was a few decades of not having to worry about an aggressive powerhouse it had traditionally been, allow Germany to retain it's power post WW1 and that's unlikely to be the same

[DrNewGod]

I will say this without America in WW1 it goes on longer and it probably results in an eventual shaky truce with most countries retaining their territory and power, and with current leadership and mentalities of Empire building and alliance chains in place, meaning that they likely do the exact same thing again at some point in the future, one of the reasons Europe was reluctant to engage with Germany was a few decades of not having to worry about an aggressive powerhouse it had traditionally been, allow Germany to retain it's power post WW1 and that's unlikely to be the same

Unless Great Britain owns all of North America, in which case it WW1 maybe doesn't go much past 1915, if it gets that far.

[Hiromi]

I doubt it, the problem with the original 13 colonies are still going to be there, and it exacerbates itself the further they extend inland and the colonist become separated even further culturally from the Island(particularly since a driving force to move West was the independent spirit), plus there's no way in Hell the Louisiana Purchase happens if the British still own the colonies, same with Spanish territory

Without the US I imagine North America ends up as something of a reflection of Western Europe in numerous smaller countries with their own alliances and rivalries

[mbm721]

No ! It's just that Hitler mastered the art of mass manipulation.
Look at Trump, he is an idiot. He's only rich because of his father. He got elected just because he well manipulated his fellow Americans.

Really? “No!” Without any explanation why and just transition to your point. Your point is valid too. I agree Hitler mastered propaganda but it wasn’t “just” that. Hunger, stress, anxiety among the Germans caused by the post versailles treaty economy allowed them to be more easily manipulated by the allure of Nazi party led by Hitler.