- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Would it have been better if Germany would have won WW1? The First One.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 3:10 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
Posted on 5/9/16 at 3:10 pm to StrongBackWeakMind
quote:
I think it's because they got rolled in WWII and America loves it some WWII.
Britain would have gotten rolled too if not for being on an island.
0
Posted on 5/9/16 at 3:25 pm to fr33manator
Everyone would have died eventually. And we wouldn't have GPS or really much of anything satellite-based. Sure, rockets would probably have eventually been invented anyway but nothing accelerates technological advances as much as our desire to kill each other.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 3:36 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
The Great Depression was unrelated to the results of WWI.
This is extremely inaccurate. At the very least, World War I was a major factor in the crash.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 3:38 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 3:44 pm to fr33manator
quote:how do we know that germany doesnt impose harsh war reparations on england and france? how do we know that if those reparations are imposed, that they dont lead to the rise of nationalism in those countries like it did in germany? how do we know that if there is a rise of nationalism in france and england, it doesnt lead to a hitler like figure to bring about fascism in those countries? how do we know that if fascism does come in those countries, they dont start a second world war? how do we know that if none of those things happen, that a cold war doesnt develop between the united states and the victorious germans in the decades that follow? how do we know that since we have no frame of reference for the destruction capabilites of nuclear weapons, that the united states and the germans actually fight a nuclear war sometime in the 20th century?
So what does the OT think? Would a quick German victory have been preferable to the reality we know of a prolonged Allied victory?
for how many possible events that could be changed for the positive if germany wins ww1, there are potentially negative
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 3:45 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 4:00 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
ow do we know that germany doesnt impose harsh war reparations on england and france?
Germany declared war on France on August 3, 1914. The scenario in the OP speculates that the Germans defeat the French Army and BEF within 60 days. Harsh reparations would not be necessary nor would they be demanded.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 4:00 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
How do we know that germany doesnt impose harsh war reparations on england and france?
The scenario in the OP speculates that the Germans defeat the French Army and BEF within 60 days of the outbreak of war. Harsh reparations would not be necessary nor would they be demanded.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 4:01 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 4:50 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Germany declared war on France on August 3, 1914. The scenario in the OP speculates that the Germans defeat the French Army and BEF within 60 days. Harsh reparations would not be necessary nor would they be demanded.
After a short war there would not be that overwhelming need for vengeance on the part of Germany like the Allies had in 1918-1919. I think France and Russia both would have territorial concessions they'd have to give. In the case of Russia these demands would come from both Germany and Austria-Hungary. I highly doubt the Germans would try to impose on the Russians anything like what they later did in the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk. More than likely it would be roughly along the lines the remainder of what is modern day Poland.
As for France, I think thee would be an adjustment of the border to the point perhaps places like Verdun became border towns. I don't see much more than that though. The last thing the Germans wanted was to try and pacify a large French population.
As for Great Britain, maybe there would be some overseas possessions change hands, like in Africa perhaps. Past that, I don't see Germany trying to imposing anything harsh on the English.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 4:55 pm to fr33manator
It would've been better if the US and Britain had stopped that stupid war like they could have.
War that gave the world the Bolsheviks and the Nazis. And A war that could've been stopped
War that gave the world the Bolsheviks and the Nazis. And A war that could've been stopped
Posted on 5/9/16 at 5:05 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:this is where i disagree. germany wanted a vast colonial empire and always saw britain as their biggest obstacle to this just like they always saw france as their biggest obstacle to being the top dog on the continent. i have a hard time believing that they would achieve such a fast a dominating victory that they would not want terms that could assure both. maybe war reparations arent the correct term, but a peace treaty in that severely cripples and puts restraints on britains naval power to keep them from challenging the new german colonies, and their old ones, while also crippling and placing restrictions on frances ability to re arm its army to keep them from challenging their new territorial gains in europe doesnt seem out of the question to me.
As for France, I think thee would be an adjustment of the border to the point perhaps places like Verdun became border towns. I don't see much more than that though. The last thing the Germans wanted was to try and pacify a large French population. As for Great Britain, maybe there would be some overseas possessions change hands, like in Africa perhaps. Past that, I don't see Germany trying to imposing anything harsh on the English.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 5:09 pm to WestCoastAg
They might seek such naval concessions from GB, but they'd never get them. Britian would have told Germany to kiss their arse. Germany would then be faced with a similar dilemma as they face after the fall of France in 1940, especially if the Russians didn't sue for peace right away.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 5:17 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:and then the war would continue. if the scenario is that germany crushes france and the BEF in two months, they would be in a position of such strength that they would never accept peace without achieving their two main goals in fighting the war in the first place. they would just continue to fight the war until britain would accept their terms
Britian would have told Germany to kiss their arse
quote:i thought this scenario also assumes that russia surrenders once britain and france capitulate. isnt that the quick peace? i also dont necessarily agree with this because that was a different situation. hitler didnt really view england as a dilemma as much as a burden. he had no real interest in invading britain after the battle of britain and just thought he could starve them out. his focus was always on russia
Germany would then be faced with a similar dilemma as they face after the fall of France in 1940, especially if the Russians didn't sue for peace right away
Posted on 5/9/16 at 5:19 pm to fr33manator
quote:
Possibly No Russian Revolution.
that's the clincher.
just about anything would have been better than the russian revolution.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 6:01 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
and then the war would continue. if the scenario is that germany crushes france and the BEF in two months, they would be in a position of such strength that they would never accept peace without achieving their two main goals in fighting the war in the first place.
Doubtful. The Germans didn't want to fight Great Britain to begin with.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 6:10 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
Doubtful. The Germans didn't want to fight Great Britain to begin with.
Yup. And public sentiment was against it. If not for Belgium they wouldn't have entered. And with such a small army ("if they land here, we will have them arrested") they'd have been smashed.
A quick knockout punch would have broken the British resolve.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 6:43 pm to fr33manator
Without using the search function to see if someone already posted it.....
I'm gonna say they probably wouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor.
So there's that.
I'm gonna say they probably wouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor.
So there's that.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 7:54 pm to RollTide1987
quote:they absolutely wanted to cement their place as the dominant colonial power. They may not have wanted to fight them initially, but once they started to they were committed and if they had crushed the BEF in only 60 days, they absolutely would continue fighting if Britain wanted to hold out
The Germans didn't want to fight Great Britain to begin with.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 7:55 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 7:56 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
they absolutely wanted to cement their place as the dominant colonial power. They may not have wanted to fight them initially, but once they started to they were committed and if they had crushed the BEF in only 60 days, they absolutely would continue fighting if Britain wanted to hold out
Their only option after the fighting ended in France would be to sortie their Fleet and meet the Royal Navy in battle. And we all know how that turned out.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 7:57 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:or take the fight to the British colonies in africa and the middle east
Their only option after the fighting ended in France would be to sortie their Fleet and meet the Royal Navy in battle
Posted on 5/9/16 at 7:59 pm to fr33manator
I wouldn't have been conceived, so obviously not.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:04 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
or take the fight to the British colonies in africa and the middle east
That's a possibility, at least that they'd try. They'd still have to move forces from Germany though to do it. The Germans just didn't have strong enough forces overseas to be a real threat on their own. The Brits on the other hand could call on colonial or allied forces from all sorts of places like Canada, Austrialia, and India.
The need to move forces from Germany to any overseas theaters would require the Germans to overcome the British Grand Fleet. So you'd still have to have something akin to the Battle of Jutland.
Page 5 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News