Fair enough. Only we two seem interested, and this is a crucial decision.

Quote:
Well Industrial capacity and demand in the US is far better off in FFO then in OTL.


Concur, and this will play in to internal US politics.

Quote:
Also could you see an FFO RN standing for King telling them to stay out of the Pacific or the MN?


No. They could actually smack him down in FFO and could even afford to be a little harsh about it. A comment of 'well, we lost a fleet to them but have sunk 3 of their BB and 2 of their CV and we are STILL fighting in Indo-China and Singapore long after the Philippines has fallen. You are fighting well but have a long way to go yet, you have also lost a fleet to them but have only 2 BB to show for it (remember that they think Maya was a Kongo).

Quote:
Even when he was just the Commander US Fleet up till March 1942 he fought constantly with Stark about implementing suggestions that the RN was making about improving the situation on the East Coast.


True,a nd he would have done the same in FFO and would not have fared well about it. Does this mean his stock is lower?

Quote:
FDR will know that the RN and England are not the damaged and nearly exhausted nation that they were in OTL and wont stand for attitude from King like they did in OTL, in an FFO world.


True, the US just cannot afford that and neither can the RN of course. it would sour relationships, and badly. The British are NOT economic mendicants in FFO, and they will not become so.
BTW, this factor will also raise Eisenhower's stocks faster than in OTL.

Quote:
(imo) As for how he will treat or react to the MN is another kettle of fish.


Good point. The thrust so far is that London and Algiers are presenting a united Anglo-French front to Washington (this is just smart politics), with the inevitable arguments behind the scenes being carefully concealed. I think that careful front will continue to hold.

Cheers: Mark