The notion that the US acted in ‘WASP solidarity” with Britain needs much more evidence than just that WASP firms made loans (which were repaid with interest!).

Britain and the USA broke apart in the 18th century precisely because they did NOT feel a strong political solidarity. That division was religious. Although (for example) Woodrow Wilson’s religious views and the UK’s state Anglicanism were both technically “protestant” they were neither theologically similar nor similar in their political associations.

If the basis of solidarity is meant to be purely racial, the largest recent racial origin group in the USA in 1917 was German, and in any case Anglo-Saxons are a Germanic people; it is hard to get excited about Britain vs Germany as a racial conflict and I’m not aware of any major statements by important people that this was a motivation. Before WWI, the explicit Anglo-Saxon racial supremacist Cecil Rhodes included Germans in his other Anglo-only Rhodes Scholarship precisely because he saw them as racially compatible!

In 1918, Wilson said this to King George V:

“You must not speak of us … as cousins, still less as brothers; we are neither. Neither must you think of us as Anglo-Saxons, for that term can no longer be rightly applied to the people of the United States … there are only two things which can establish and maintain closer relations between your country and mine: they are community of ideals and of interests.”

You’re right that the Jews’ main interest was Russia and bringing down the Tsar, up until the revolutions of 1917. It stands to reason that after they replaced the Tsar with the (very pro-Jewish, in fact heavily Jewish-governed) USSR they no longer favored indefinite German expansion at the USSR’s expense but rather a peace that would allow the USSR to survive and grow. Jacob Schiff, for example, funded the USSR.

And that brings us to one of the most consequential “unknown knows” of WWI as a whole: the idea that America caused the Entente to “win” assumes that the Entente did “win”, but in fact the Entente exercised almost no control after 1919 furthe east than the Left Bank of the Rhine. Wilson at Versailles called for “peace without victory”, and while the French did succeed in diluting this with realpolitik concessions to France, almost all of Eastern Europe because a free-for-all in which the USSR would have made major conquests had it not been militarily defeated by the new Polish Republic at the Battle of Warsaw in 1919.

Everything that happened is consistent with the US acting in response to Jewish interests. I can only agree that Jewish interests were not the *only* interests influencing the USA, or that the dual Jewish interests in Zionism and Soviet Communism *completely* determined US policy, but they do seem to have been ultimately predominant.