At what point did America's ascendance become impossible to stop?

At what point did America's ascendance become impossible to stop?

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

  1. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    >assuming they are as relevant today and not in rapid decline

  2. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    behold

  3. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Post civil war

  4. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    The civil war is precisely what enabled America to ascend to its current position so 1865

  5. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    as other anons have said, the ACW. heavy European support for the CSA particularly in the first half might well have dissolved the idea of a united American nation-state. the British disliked slavery too much to do that though

    the thing is though, an America even without the Southern states would still constitute a very major world power capable of being the decisive influence in the world wars

  6. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    After the civil war, even before it the UK wasn't confident in winning a war with it in the America's, but after it was impossible

  7. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Somewhere between 1914-1916. After the great European empires decided to mortgage their patrimonies for he goal of killing other Europeans any hope for Euros keeping America at parity was over.

  8. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    since it was prophesied in the middle ages by freemasons

  9. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    1815 when the Nationalists began to push for industrialization and expansion westward.

  10. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    The fifty years between the end of the American Civil War and the US entry into WWI was the last window for curbing the US’ growing power. I would say if the great European powers formed a coalition with Spain in 1898, then the US could’ve been brought to heel. But, that was the absolutely last point in which anything like that could’ve occurred tbh

    • 6 days ago
      Anonymous

      Not even an entire European coalition would had been able to invade the US in any meaningful number. Shore hugging monitors were the extreme meta and the US had alot of them, none of the Euro c**ts would had been able to move such a large fleet without losing atleast a third to attrition, and then there's the massively fractious nature of Euros. For every coalition member, there'd be two weaker neighbors salivating at the thought of invading as they send hundreds of thousands to die in the sea. Either before the civil war, or never at all. The US barely broke a sweat defeating Spain because of the shit nature of logistics at the time, imagine wanting to assemble atleast a million to invade the US? Unimaginable, coupled with the lolbert nature of rural Americans, it'd be the Soviet Unions partisans on steroids'

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        they wouldn't have needed to invade the US to curb its expansionist tendencies.
        If some sort of pan-European coalition inflicted some sort of significant American military reversal in Cuba or Puerto Rico or even navally in the Philippines during the Spanish-American war, the American public would have been way more reluctant to engage in the World Wars or any foreign adventures abroad. the long grinding counterinsurgency in the Philippines around the turn of the century put a significant damper on the American public's enthusiasm for expansion with a lot of people questioning it. it wouldn't be hypothetically necessary to invade and entirely subjugate the United States to reduce its ascendancy to global superpower.
        If something very militarily/politically distasteful had happened in the years prior to America's ascendancy to global superpower status, there's a very good chance that the US would isolate itself into only being a superpower within North and South America and leaving the rest of the world alone.
        there has always been a strong isolationist tendency within the American mindset, at least prior to 1941. The reason it didn't grow and spread in the late 19th/early 20th century was because the US kept racking up one easy win after another. if the US Army circa 1870-1905 had been forced to go through a long, bloody, disease-ridden meat grinder siege against a European army in Cuba similar to the one the Anglos, French and Russians had gone through during the Crimean War, who knows if the US would ever had been willing to enter WW1.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          Congrats you took back colonies that were massive drains to both the Spanish and the Americans. And no the public would rally like never before to fight what would rightly be seen as a crusade to end the USA. It would be a jihad on steroids. Our coast line is massive, we could build a massive fleet with impunity due to the massive industrial base in the USA that was ahead of every European power but the UK which would be the most reluctant and actually suffers from having the most war adverse population in history at that point. This massive coalition would just create a massively vindictive state that would put modern China and Russia to shame, leading to the USA possibly even nuking various European cities in the subsequent alternate world wars

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >loud hindsight posturing about how a war over who gets to keep Cuba would be a "jihad on steroids"
            yeah yeah yeah, you're very impressive and scary. Anyway, all the evidence we've ever witnessed about the US's behaviour abroad points towards what i'm stating, and not what you are.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >A massive united European coalition
            >for a small island that Spain does not control outside of Havana
            Think anon, think

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >hypothetically
            >HYPOTHETICALLY
            Yes obviously there’s no way the UK, France and Prussia would ever resolve their differences enough in order to pour a giant amount of resources into jobbing the USA. In the early 1900s the UK and France were too busy coming within a hair’s breath of shooting at each other over who gets what in Africa. Think Anon think

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            So the USA is not able to act united in the face of a massive united Europe but you’re able to whisk away thousands of years of inter-hatred among Euros for… a tiny island. Thinking is beyond you it seems

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >but you’re able to whisk away thousands of years of inter-hatred among Euros for… a tiny island
            i've made it incredibly clear that I know the idea of a pan-European anti-America coalition to defend Spain's colonies had an exactly 0% chance of ever happening, stupid. this is purely Harry Turtledove-tier alt hist that i'm speculating about.

      • 6 days ago
        Anonymous

        Britian would. Since they still ruled an incredibly friendly Canada, the US would’ve been prime target for invasion. Remember that Spain was a decrepit, crumbling empire at this point.

        • 6 days ago
          Anonymous

          The UK was too scared to challenge the US when it gave it the bulk of the Oregon country and the remainder of Maine in 1842 let alone a USA that has doubled in population and has industrialized hard

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            17 mil to 61 mil, alot larger damn

            >but you’re able to whisk away thousands of years of inter-hatred among Euros for… a tiny island
            i've made it incredibly clear that I know the idea of a pan-European anti-America coalition to defend Spain's colonies had an exactly 0% chance of ever happening, stupid. this is purely Harry Turtledove-tier alt hist that i'm speculating about.

            And yes i am not denying the premise which for some reason your dumb ass has forgotten, that i initially proposed. I’m just saying that such a war would unite the American public due to how apparently anti American such a massive coalition would look to the American public, this is no longer a war to free Cuba, but a second war of independence. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >i’m just saying that such a war would unite the American public due to how apparently anti American such a massive coalition would look to the American public, this is no longer a war to free Cuba, but a second war of independence
            The funny thing about this is that you’re implying that the American population is dumb as bricks for thinking a war to seize Cuba would turn into Independence Total War 2.0 and I’m arguing in favour of Americans being somewhat smarter and more even-tempered than that. The possibility of some sort of pan-European alliance to keep cuba is obviously impossible. I’ve ALSO been trying to argue strictly concerning what the US reaction would be to going through a Crimea style slog of a war against the euros. In 1812 they didn’t do what you’re saying they’d do. When the US brushed up against the British empire a million times throughout the 19th century they have no indication of doing what you’re saying they’d do. Dumbass.

          • 6 days ago
            Anonymous

            >The funny thing about this is that you’re implying that the American population is dumb as bricks for thinking a war to seize Cuba would turn into Independence Total War 2.0
            You realize this was before mass media and the internet, and that the Monroe Doctrine was cast in steel by that point as America's #1 foreign policy priority for nearly a century, right?

  11. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Brezhnev, it's all Brezhnev's fault

  12. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    after ww2

  13. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    1776 baby.

  14. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    After Europe got tired of competing over their nothingburger of a continent and decided to give the reins to the USSR and U.S to manage the the continent, and as a result compete over the rest of the planet. There was no chance the Soviets would survive until the end of the century regardless of how much the U.S could frick up, so the U.S' rise to hegemon became inevitable after the World Wars.

  15. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Lousiana purchase
    the sheer amount of productive land they had was insane at that point, even without the west coast America would still probably be number 1

  16. 6 days ago
    Anonymous

    Tater blight in ireland created the population base and hustler concentration for industrial growth

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *