Could the US have prevented WWII?

Answer 1

The short answer? No. Not at all. The US rose to prominence over the course of that war in many ways and for many reasons, but it was not there at the outset.

Could WWII have been prevented. Possibly. For that, I cite historian A.J.P. Taylor.

The difficulty that Britain and France faced in 1938 leading to Munich was that Czechoslovakia, Hitler's next target, was on the other side of Germany. In other words, there was no way that French and British forces could intervene. Much effort was expended on trying to draw the Soviet Union into the equation, getting them to stand as guarantors of Czech independence. The Soviets agreed to undertake this role, if Britain and France could secure passage for Soviet forces so that they could get there. The USSR did not border Czechoslovakia, either.

That passage would have to go through Poland, and Poland, in one of history's paradoxes, rebuffed the request, though they did agree to allow Soviet passage in response to hostilities, not prior to that. The Soviets said no, they sensibly wanted their troops dug in before hostilities commenced (which could serve to deter any invasion as well as repulse it), not be trying to scramble into place ahead of the blitzkrieg.

Talks broke down. Stalin signed the non-aggression pact; Britain and France signed the Munich accord, in a last, desperate gamble to make the best of an impossible situation.

Given that the British ambassador to Germany was sympathetic to Hitler (not an unknown attitude in the West), the governments in Paris and London were unaware that a resistance movement had organised inside the Reich, including a panzer division and other components of the Wehrmacht, to overthrow Hitler the minute Britain and France drew a line in the sand. Many people in Germany were loathe to repeat 1914-18 so the chances were good that it might have succeeded.

After Munich, though, it disbanded in demoralized panic.

Churchill, aware of this movement, remarked to someone at the time that if a second world war were to happen, history would judge it "the unecessary war."

Answer 2

That is a very difficult question to answer. Some say yes, some say no. You see, the US didn't want to get involved in the first place until push came to shove. The US could not have prevented it, for the most part. The UK couldn't, the USSR couldn't... so, no--- . That horrible Austrian dictator was driven and had enough power to almost win in the end. As you know, Italy and Japan fought along side the Germans. For the USA to prevent this war would be impossible. However, one truly cannot say either way. That is one for the world leaders to answer, and even so, they would have different opinions in the end.

Upon reading Gooselane's response, I am in complete agreement. Gooselane has a valid point.

Answer 3

No-the US was a very weak nation in military terms in 1939. Due to isolationism the US was just not a "player" in world affairs in the 1930s. I can't really blame Americans for turning towards isolationism after the carnage of the WW1 though. It was after the conflict in Europe commenced that the US began to rearm in earnest. I feel that Imperial Japan eventually would have attacked Manila even if the US had not implemented the oil boycott. Maybe appeasement could have delayed the conflict in the Pacific, but the US and Japan had been on a collision course for a while.

Answer 4

No they could not have prevented the war but they could have stopped the Poland invasion allied with Great Britain as well.
America made a mistake by trusting Hitler and his dealing with Britain as well was a mistake, and the Brits paid dearly for that mistake. The deal with HItler was an avenue because of Stalin, and giving Germany that property would appease him enough that they thought they were immune? Well think again? they were dealing with a maniac, like Sadaam Hussein, we got him to help us against Iran and look what happened? It is a very dangerous business politics. And to err is human but to err on behalf of all those peoples lives, that is another issue.

Answer 5

The United States could have prevented World War II.

I believe World War II was essentually the consequence of the unsatisfactory "conclusion" to World War I. Given the inevitability of World War I due to numerous reasons ( i.e., militarism and weak forms of democracy in even the most advanced European nations; the ineffective governence of the "ancient regimes" of Turkey, Russia, and the Austro-Hungarian empire; imperialism--especially as practiced by England, Germany, France, and Japan; and the coupling of these issues due to secret alliances and proxy states), it seems to me that the United States could have prevented World War II through one of two courses of actions:

1. The United States could have prevented World War II from occurring by NOT ENTERING WORLD WAR I. If the United States had remained neutral and not entered that war, the eventual peace settlement would most probably have created a wholly different dynamic. (Without United States' entry into the war, the exhaustion of resources experienced by all the fighting nations would have been amplified, thus necessitating a more moderate outcome--one in which post-war Germany as well as other participating nations would have been left with much healthier conditions both politically and economically. Conditions which should have prevented future facists and demagogues from coming to power.)

2. If one takes the position that the United States had to enter World War I in order to preserve the values of democracy and/or the freedom of the seas, then I believe the United States could still have prevented World War II by demanding that there be a "fair" peace settlement, and that a United Nations type of organization--with interventionist powers--be created to resolve international differences in the future. These stipulations could have provided a means for nations such as Germany and Japan to negotiate in order to resolve their grievances. On the other hand, failing diplomatic efforts to resolve issues, illegal aggression could have been met with a united, international counter-attack, stopping the aggression before it expanded into wider conflict.

Absent these actions, I feel there was no way for World War II to be stopped by the United States.

Answer 6

The US had no army to speak of, and couldn't possibly have influenced events in Europe. Had we built our navy to the level allowed by treaty and paid attention to naval aviation warfare, either an exceptionally difficult choice while recovering from the Great Depression, it's possible we might have discouraged the Japanese southern push, but their only other choice was the northern plan in which they'd already gotten a bloody nose from a much more worrisome traditional enemy in the USSR.

Answer 7

maybe, if somehow the US public supported the US taking initiative in Europe to stop Hitler as soon as he annexed the Rhineland and began remilitarization. The US would have to come out of isolationism, which would be highly unlikely. It was the US's lack of action during all the major international crises (Rhineland, Anschluss, Munich Pact, Italian Abyssinia Invasion, Manchurian invasion by Japs, etc.) that fueled Hitler's action.

Answer 8

The US couldn't have prevented the war because they were trying to stay isolated from European affairs. Britain and France could've stopped it in 1936 when Hitler took over the Rhineland and again when they let Hitler take the Sudetenland in Czechoslvakia.

Answer 9

the germans could of prevented it by not letting adolf hitler come to power in the first place.

HindenBurg should of never appointed Hitler as Reich Chancelor.

Answer 10

50 years ago.

A real, bonafide villain (Hitler).

Millions of American dollars spent rebuilding Europe and Japan.

And we're STILL trying to think of a way to Blame America First.