re: Imperial Germany Could Have Won in 1918!

I don't know why two folks downvoted you because you are IMHO correct. An all-out, multi-echeloned attack on the French part of the front may well have worked.

Ludendorff's weakness was that he didn't seem capable of forming a proper commander's intent that could be focused on the enemy's critical center of gravity. He dissipated his offensive power instead of concentrating it.

Guderian said "Klotzen, nicht Kleckern!"

quote:

---

I disagree. The German people were done. Those little successes in 1918 weren’t sustained.

Even if the US doesn’t enter the war, Germany is done by 1919 in my opinion. Austria-Hungary and The Ottomans were calling it quits in 1918 regardless.

---

We can agree to disagree.

My assessment is that Imperial Germany did have a window of opportunity to win the war in early 1918.

Operation Michael was a "little success"? It was only the largest advance on the Western Front since 1914.

quote:

---

and he’s Gucci.

---

Have a down vote for using this phrase with a straight face.

It's economy collapsed which is why it surrendered

quote:

---

This, Germany had no way of penetrating in to France, the UK is completely off the table because it’s an island. They also had manpower and resources from other continents to utilize while Germany was at its last breath.

---

Germany was already close enough to Paris to bombard it with a heavy artillery battery, so, they were already deep into France. There was no plan to land German troops on the British Homeland.

Britain had more troops stationed on the British Homeland, but, they had a plan to refuse use of them in France in order to deprive Haig of the chance to waste them in another offensive, like Haig did at Passchendaele in late 1917.

Yes, Imperial Germany was in dire straits, BUT, Russia had just surrendered and all of those divisions that were in the East were sent to the Western Front and were trained in the new Infiltration Tactics. These critical factors presented a window of opportunity.

Great Britain herself was also in dire straits in 1918. The British Army on the Western Front was compelled by manpower shortages to disband one entire Brigade (that is three Battalions) in every Division on the Western Front. This desperate measure was required to bring the British Divisions back up to full strength, since no reinforcements from the Home Front were forthcoming.

Here's an article on the subject of the dire straits of the British Army in France in 1918.

LINK

If Imperial Germany could maintain momentum after the Breakthrough and capture some Strategic Objectives, such as Paris, or the Channel Ports, the Allies would have faced such a catastrophe by Summer, 1918, that a brokered Peace Deal might have been the only reasonable course of action.

quote:

---

It could be argued that had the Ottomans survived WW I, there is no 9/11, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Egypt, Lebanon, etc or middle east strife.

---

Anything can be argued. Britain survived WWI and lost its empire, the Soviet Union survived WWII, and lost its empire. Nationalism and ethnicity are powerful things.

A flight of fantasy. Germany was facing critical shortages in 1918. The British navy had effectively shut off shipping. The Germans could not get oil out of Romania due to the British commandos blowing up the oil refineries there. The entrance of the Americans tipped the scales very much in favor of the Allies in 1917 by early 1918 they were in an unwinnable position.

Britain and France could have won thae war by themselves over time. The British in particular were leveraging their access to oil in Persia and Royal Dutch Shell , although ostensibly a Dutch company was sending most of its oil to the UK. On top of it the French and English were also using troops from the empire. We tend to think of the English Tommy's, but there were close to a million Indians involved as well and Aussies and Canadians. The French were leveraging a lot of their African colonies....the Senegalese and Algerian and Moroccans.

The Americans were essentially brought in for the kill shot during the summer of 1918.

Germany didn't have the manpower capability of the British Empire. The American intervention certainly moved the inevitably process forward, but even in a trench stalemate, the British and French would have prevailed even at an even more horrendous loss of life.

Are you aware that in March, 1918, Imperial Germany had the advantage of numbers on the Western Front?

This window of opportunity in which they might have forced the Allies to negotiate for peace was indeed brief, we do agree on that.

quote:

---

Paris is not deep in to France lol. France is the 3rd largest country in Europe.

---

Paris is the capital. I think that most would agree that, when your military forces are in artillery range of Paris, you are "deep into France." We are arguing semantics here.

I agree that Imperial Germany could not overrun all of France like they did in 1940. I also point out that none of the historical sources on World War One hold the view that overrunning all of France was necessary to force the Allies to the Peace Table.

So, whether Imperial Germany was "deep" in France is not relevant.