I read:
Geoffrey Thorndyke
Lived in the UK since 1944 September 14

What would have happened to the USA if Britain had been defeated at the
Battle of Britain?
Logic says that the most likely result of the RAF losing the battle
would be a cessation of hostilities. The Germans could not have invaded,
they would never have got past the Navy. The RAF would remain in being
as only 2 Groups were actively opposed to the Luftwaffe during the
battle. So let us say there was a cease fire and Hitler concentrated on
Europe, leaving the UK with it’s Empire.

So that also takes Canada out of the War as well as other Countries in
the Empire. Whether the UK would have stayed in North Africa to protect
our access to the Suez canal, no one knows. What the Italians would do
is also moot. Now as far as I am aware the USA only officially entered
WW2 when Germany declared War on them after the Japanese attack at Pearl
Harbour. If the UK stopped fighting towards the end of 1940 why would
Germany have declared War on the USA over a year after hostilities
ceased with the UK ?

This scenario leaves Germany with Just Russia to defeat, with a much
larger Luftwaffe, hundreds more experienced aircrew, and many more
soldiers, guns and materials as it does not have to defend against RAF
Bomber command.

Arguably you have a German Empire in Europe, a British Empire in many
parts of the World and USA fighting Japan. Only without inputs from
British and European scientists the “Bomb” might have taken longer to
complete and the defeat of Japan delayed.

Logically in this scenario there is no reason why the USA would get
involved in the conflict in Europe. A very different World in fact.

(I disagree with Thorndyke. I can not see WSC doing
a "cessation of hostilities". Then, the much more
important Battle of the Atlantic, would continue.
And in late 1941 the USA would continue to get drawn in.
But then, here are other's opinions:)

Peter Valentine

It seems likely that a cessation of hstilities, which is what Hitler
dreamed of as he never wanted a conflict with Britain, its Commonweath
and Empire, would have led to trade deals with Germany. They would have
loved to buy some of our military equipment (tihnk 4-engined heavy
bombers). A cessation of hostilities would have encouraged such
arrangements.

This, in turn, would have led to the demise of Russia and thus of communism.

How that would have shaped the future is anyone’s guess.

Brythonic Man
September 15

Agreed Geoffrey, coupled with the fact that Germany and Britain would
have the jet engine, which was in operation at the very end of WWII, the
USA was nowhere near. Germany had rocket technology, the V2 was used
against Britain but was developing very quickly to become even more
threatening.

Some of the Royal Navy (the largest in the world at the time) might have
made it to Canada, but most of it would have been taken over by the
Nazis. There would have been no Mers el Kabir incident, so the all the
French Navy would have been intact for the Nazis to use as well. Iceland
would have been occupied by the Germans instead of the British, giving
them control of a substantial part of the North Atlantic.

A Pan European Nazi superpower would have emerged and not having to
worry about Britain and Commonwealth allies, the Soviets would have been
been defeated by the Germans from the west and to a lesser extent the
Japanese from the east, particularly bearing in mind that The Arctic
Convoys delivering much needed armaments to the Soviet Union by the
Royal Navy would never have taken place.

British owned countries in Africa, the Far East and also India may
possibly have continued in some kind of peace deal, but personally I
believe that would have been highly unlikely as Japan had it's eye on
India as well as China.

As you mentioned, the Amerkia Bomber was only on the planning board, but
with the availability of jet powered fighters by 1944 development of jet
powered bombers would not have been far away. Those bombers would have
most certainly been used from Hitler's plan to use the Azores as a base
for attack on the American east coast. The oilfields in the Middle East
would have been under Nazis control, because the German defeat by the
British and ANZAC forces at El Alamein in 1942 would never have taken place.

You mentioned that it would probably have taken longer for the Americans
to develop the Atom bomb without the help of the British, but given that
the British on thier own would have eventually developed the bomb
themselves it would have created a further issue for the USA. In all
probability the Americans would have been ahead of the British in
developing the A-bomb, but of course the British scientists would now be
working for the Nazis. With the USA still well behind in developing the
jet engine, there is no way they could have retaliated with nuclear
bombs as it was more than a 6,000 mile non stop round journey for props,
so potentially by the late 1940’s the east coast of America could have
been hit by the A-bomb with the Amerkia Bomber having been upgraded from
a prop to a jet, plus the threat from the west by the Japanese.

Thankfully, the British were victorious in 1940 by defeating the
Luftwaffe and even if they had lost, the Royal Navy would have been a
major obstacle for the German armed forces to run rampant though the
British Isles.

Stephen Phillips
September 18
Much depends in this scenario on what happens to British oil. If
cessation of hostilities led to trading oil with Germany and perhaps
Japan, then we have a different world indeed, probably no Pearl Harbour
for instance. No trade in oil would likely have led to further conflict
down the line. The USSR without logistical support from the UK and US
would have made the eastern front more uncertain.

Eloise Hellyer
September 22
I agree with everything except the bit about input from European
scientists. They were Jewish and this is why they fled their homes which
were occupied by Germany and went to the States. Of course, after the
war we got Werner con Braun which we wouldn’t have in your scenario, but
that’s a different story.

Martin Hogbin
23h ago
Actually, nuclear weapons could have been developed first by Britain or
Germany or even both working together.

That axis could have had nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.

That would have really changed the world.

On 10/4/21 11:55 AM, a425couple wrote:
> I read:
> Geoffrey Thorndyke
> Lived in the UK since 1944 September 14
>
> What would have happened to the USA if Britain had been defeated at the
> Battle of Britain?
> Logic says that the most likely result of the RAF losing the battle
> would be a cessation of hostilities.

Neither HItler nor Churchill were being "logical" at this time.

Germany definitely intended to attempt the invasion of Britain if
the Luftwaffe gained air supremacy over the Channel. THe attack
wold almost certainly fail, with significant losses to both the
German army and the Royal Navy.

I doubt very much whether either side would want a truce after that.

--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdés.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.