What if Mexico agreed to Germany's terms in the Zimmerman Note and attempted to invade America? I think it would have forced America into World War 1 quicker, but of course Mexico would get owned. Then we would liberate Mexico and install a friendly government (more make them a territory/state). What do you think would have happened?
-
We are currently performing site maintenance, parts of civfanatics are currently offline, but will come back online in the coming days (this includes any time you see the message "account suspended"). For more updates please see here.
What if Mexico declared war on America in WW1?
- Thread starter Saturn
- Start date
Terxpahseyton
Nobody
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2006
- Messages
- 10,759
Pretty much the same I guess, except that Mexico and with it the US would look fairly different today.
Maybe the Mexican distraction would make the American side more prone to peace and the Kaiser would have stayed in office, which pretty much would change the entire earth's history from this point onwards.
Well this and a million other things too unpredictable to even begin to grasp them.
Maybe the Mexican distraction would make the American side more prone to peace and the Kaiser would have stayed in office, which pretty much would change the entire earth's history from this point onwards.
Well this and a million other things too unpredictable to even begin to grasp them.
Communisto
Condottiere
The Americans were pretty much all over Mexico at that time anyways. Mexico wasn't really in the position do anything productive at all, for a long time.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
I dislike all what-ifs, but this one is particularly corny because there's no reason in the universe for Mexico to go to war against the U.S. For one, Mexico had a fraction of the population, military technology and resources as the U.S.
Two, Mexico was already engaged in a huge civil war. There barely was a "Mexican state" to speak of at all. By contrast, the U.S. was not at war with the Central Powers yet and therefore could've unleashed its full power to steamroll Mexico even worse than in the Mexican-American War of 1846-48.
Three, the given incentive for this hypothetical war is that Germany would have financially aided Mexico, but this would've meant nothing because (a) the U.S. would've immediately blockaded Mexico and (b) the U.S. held a near-monopoly on weapons and explosives production in the Western Hemisphere.
Four, supposing even then that the moment Mexico invades that every American officer catches the flu and every Mexican officer becomes Napoleon Bonaparte, victories would've meant nothing because there is no reason why any citizens in U.S. territory would not have given the occupying forces extreme hell.
Five, even supposing the above plus the Mexican officers have preternatural powers to pacify the populations they purport to please, a war with the U.S. would also mean a war against the Entente and most of Latin America, thus assuring that if Mexico didn't become a puppet state of the U.S. (like the Philippines), it would become a colony.
However, upon reflection, giving the Mexicans the aforementioned magic powers so much that they're able to go to war with the Allies might make a good Anime.
Two, Mexico was already engaged in a huge civil war. There barely was a "Mexican state" to speak of at all. By contrast, the U.S. was not at war with the Central Powers yet and therefore could've unleashed its full power to steamroll Mexico even worse than in the Mexican-American War of 1846-48.
Three, the given incentive for this hypothetical war is that Germany would have financially aided Mexico, but this would've meant nothing because (a) the U.S. would've immediately blockaded Mexico and (b) the U.S. held a near-monopoly on weapons and explosives production in the Western Hemisphere.
Four, supposing even then that the moment Mexico invades that every American officer catches the flu and every Mexican officer becomes Napoleon Bonaparte, victories would've meant nothing because there is no reason why any citizens in U.S. territory would not have given the occupying forces extreme hell.
Five, even supposing the above plus the Mexican officers have preternatural powers to pacify the populations they purport to please, a war with the U.S. would also mean a war against the Entente and most of Latin America, thus assuring that if Mexico didn't become a puppet state of the U.S. (like the Philippines), it would become a colony.
However, upon reflection, giving the Mexicans the aforementioned magic powers so much that they're able to go to war with the Allies might make a good Anime.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
A very conclusive analysis, LS. Amazing how much the authenticity of the Zimmerman Note is still taught in schools (I know I was taught it).
Which was pretty bad to begin with, we occupied Veracruz and captured Mexico City. Incidentally, Mexico was in a similar political situation during that war as well.
Which was pretty bad to begin with, we occupied Veracruz and captured Mexico City. Incidentally, Mexico was in a similar political situation during that war as well.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
They were in a quasi-shooting war anyway. The US pursuit of Pancho Villa had provoked Mexican troops to mobilize and obstruct US efforts. But, I agree, as high as tensions were, Mexico had no incentive to act aggressively and invade the US. The results would have been disastrous for them.
Well, the note itself was authentic. I'm pretty sure the German ambassador even admitted it. It was debated in Mexico and ultimately rejected for the same reasons listed above. I think it was seriously considered, but chances of accepting it were always very low.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
If it weren't for Zimmermann admitting that he authored the note, I'd be 99% sure that it was forged. My current inclination is to think that either the Entente bribed Zimmerman into being the worst foreign minister ever, or there was some really strong opium being passed around the German cabinet.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
We know it was, the question is, is that the cause of the Zimmerman TelegramOr the foreign ministry during the "silent dictatorship" was just incompetent.
Two things not mentioned yet:
1st - Mexico was in the middle of a revolution against the aristocracy. Emotionally, the Mexican people were very much on the French & British side.
2nd - While the US would have (probably) won a long war against Mexico, the fact is that in 1916 the US had hardly any army at all and Mexico had several armies of experienced, battle hardened troops led by crafty, Darwinistically culled veteran generals. Remember that Pershing, for all his technological superiority, could not find Villa's army when he chased him out of New Mexico. Had they been able to be pulled together into a single force (and an American invasion of Mexico would very much have accomplished that), they would have made for a formidable fighting force. The first six months of a 1916 US-Mexican war could easily have ended up in the loss of a lot of territory.
1st - Mexico was in the middle of a revolution against the aristocracy. Emotionally, the Mexican people were very much on the French & British side.
2nd - While the US would have (probably) won a long war against Mexico, the fact is that in 1916 the US had hardly any army at all and Mexico had several armies of experienced, battle hardened troops led by crafty, Darwinistically culled veteran generals. Remember that Pershing, for all his technological superiority, could not find Villa's army when he chased him out of New Mexico. Had they been able to be pulled together into a single force (and an American invasion of Mexico would very much have accomplished that), they would have made for a formidable fighting force. The first six months of a 1916 US-Mexican war could easily have ended up in the loss of a lot of territory.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
Uh yeah, that sounds quite a bit like the Mexican-American War of 1846-48. The Americans did not have a standing army and hadn't fought a war in 34 years, but easily steamrolled the Mexicans, who had been engaged in several wars for the past two decades. You're speaking as if the situation was like Austria-Hungary and Serbia, where the latter's near-Spartan militarism allowed them some critical victories in the beginning of the war; it's nothing like that at all.
The Pancho Villa reference is astoundingly irrelevant. What does chasing a terrorist in his own country have to do with the skill of a national army? Are you aware that what provoked the chase in the first place was a raid made by Villa against a U.S. brigade that ended in catastrophic losses for his band?
Terrapin
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2003
- Messages
- 505
Yep. In the early 20th century there were no tanks or airplanes. Fighting a war just required rifles, horses and cannons/artillery. The U.S. could produce all of these things in staggering numbers for a fraction of our current military budget. That is true even if you use real dollars or go by percentage of GDP to measure the cost of outlays. Even with superior generalship, Mexico could hope for no better fate than the Confederacy: A few Pyrrhic victories early followed by crushing defeat once the American industrial machine got onto a war footing.
Bugfatty300
Buddha Squirrel
All of whom were viciously fighting each other and desperately reliant on foreign military aid.
Well that's not right. Pancho Villa was chased out of New Mexico by a tiny military garrison and some armed civilians.
Loss of territory to whom? Villa? Huerta? Carranza? Neither seems very likely...
The bulk of Villa and Carranza's army was mostly made up of local peasants and farmers. They had no motorized transportation, logistics system, navy or aircraft, and very little artillery and machine guns. Not exactly the kind of army you're going to take into an invasion of a large foreign country. And most of all neither one had any international support (not in 1916 at least) other than the US.
And what was Huerta and the Mexican Army going to do? Even with German support their performance in the war was lackluster at best and if they couldn't even defeat the rebels then how on earth were they going to take on the US?
I can't see the Mexican government actually seriously entertaining the proposal of the Zimmerman telegram. That would have ranked as one of the stupidist decisions of all time. As was said, it makes you wonder why Germany would even consider making the offer, risking antagonizing the U.S. still further (which it did) without any reasonable hope of success.
The U.S. military was small at that time, but just like how power is measured in CivIII and IV, potential power can mean more than the actual military you have.
I was taught the Zimmerman telegram in schools. Then I started to think it couldn't be for real. I was very surprised to find out it was for real. Truth can be stranger than fiction.
IIRC the U.S. entered the war shortly after the Zimmerman telegram. In some alternate Universe where the Mexican government was stoned out of its' mind, it would have had very little effect. Timing would have been little different and not very many troops would have been required to hold off any Mexican attack.
The U.S. military was small at that time, but just like how power is measured in CivIII and IV, potential power can mean more than the actual military you have.
I was taught the Zimmerman telegram in schools. Then I started to think it couldn't be for real. I was very surprised to find out it was for real. Truth can be stranger than fiction.
IIRC the U.S. entered the war shortly after the Zimmerman telegram. In some alternate Universe where the Mexican government was stoned out of its' mind, it would have had very little effect. Timing would have been little different and not very many troops would have been required to hold off any Mexican attack.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
I agree with every sentence of this post, except perhaps the Civ analogy.
Tank_Guy#3
Lion of Lehistan
This is undoubtedly what would have happened. But isn't Mexico always on the verge of chaos, I mean look at how the Cartels are basically destroying the country now.
Tank_Guy#3 said:
... No, it isn't. Countries are quite capable of surviving much much worse than that. Curiously, Mexico (11.6) has a much lower rate of intentional homicides than such pictures of relative stability as Russia (14.2), Brazil (22.0) and South Africa (36.5). Yet nobody is wondering how long it will take for Russia, Brazil and South Africa to get destroyed... Even Puerto Rico (23) is scoring higher than Mexico while USA#1 (5.0) is just under half as murderous as Big Bad Mexico.
Hardly that extreme. The Germans had already decided to resume unrestricted submarine warfare and had (most likely correctly) concluded that the U.S., already steadily moving towards supporting the Entente would almost certainly use that as an excuse to enter the war shortly. Thus, it makes perfect sense for the Germans to attempt to get the U.S. tied up in its own backyard.
It hardly matters to Germany if Mexico gets curbstomped, as long as the U.S. Army is doing the curbstomping on the other side of the Atlantic. It's not as if Germany would actually have to (or be able to) honor promises to support Mexico, so it costs them nothing, while giving them more time to plan/prepare/win the Michael offensive.
Sure, there's almost no chance the offer would be accepted, but as long as their analysis that war with the U.S. was inevitable was correct, it costs them nothing but might give them quite a bit.
LightSpectra
me autem minui
That's a rather awful policy. If there was still time for appeasement or preventing U.S. entry into the war, the Central Powers should've verily attempted it.
It does so long as it means that the Mexicans are obviously not going to enter the war.
It did "cost them something." Not counting the chance for the telegram to be intercepted (which it was), there's also the possibility that Mexico would simply have turned the telegram over to the White House anyway just to improve their own relations with the Allies.
That wasn't their analysis, nor would it have been correct if it was. The Entente was more capable of surviving a prolonged war than the Central Powers, so delaying American involvement as much as possible and gambling on a quick victory was a much better plan. Imagine for a moment how the Kaiserschlacht might've gone if there had been no American divisions in France.
Similar threads
