- 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 8:09 pm to Darth_Vader
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:09 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:any war in Africa or the middle east would obviously have to be conducted within their alliance with the ottomans. They didn't necessarily have to put them in a fleet and disembark. They could have just maneuvered them within their alliance with the ottomans. Not to mention, if they actually did crush the french, they absolutely would have received some of their colonies which would help with the logistics of it all
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.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 8:10 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:13 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
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
Once again, not true. The Germans did not want to fight Britain and were more than willing to go back to the status quo in regards to their relations with them. Had France fallen in August or September 1914 the British would have had no more reason to fight and would have sued for peace.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:16 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
any war in Africa or the middle east would obviously have to be conducted within their alliance with the ottomans. They didn't necessarily have to put them in a fleet and disembark.
The Ottomans didn't join the war until October 28. If the war lasted less than 60 days, there was no way that was happening.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:17 pm to RollTide1987
quote:maybe not initially, but they absolutely wanted nothing more than to cement themselves as the dominant colonial power and that absolutely shaped German foreign policy starting with the formation of the German empire and up until the start of the war. They may not have had any interest in actually invading the British island, but they absolutely wanted to take Britain's place as the leading colonial power and if they had crushed the BEF in two months, they sure as shite would have continued fighting to secure that
The Germans did not want to fight Britain
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:18 pm to RollTide1987
quote:which is why they would have reached out to them and promised them that they would share the colonies they take from Britain. And this is only if the British didn't capitulate
. If the war lasted less than 60 days, there was no way that was happening.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:27 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
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.
I think the submarine war would have picked up if that were the case.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:37 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
any war in Africa or the middle east would obviously have to be conducted within their alliance with the ottomans.
In the fictional war we are dealing with, it was over before the Ottomans came in. And if it were just the British that the Germans were facing, what incentive would the Ottomans have to ever get in? Keep in mind that it was Russia that drew the Ottomans into the war and before that, the Ottomans actually had reletevely good relations with the British. There's no way the Ottomans would go to war agaisnt Britain just because Germany wanted help in expanding her overseas empire.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:39 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
maybe not initially
Initially, during, and after I am afraid. Hitler didn't even want to fight Britain in World War II. He believed that Britain was Germany's natural ally and wanted nothing more than to make peace with them for the longest time. Germany has always had a love affair with the British. They never, at any point in their history, ever had a desire to go to war with England. They wanted to be the dominant colonial power in the world, to be sure, but they were not willing to go to war with Britain to achieve that goal.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:43 pm to RollTide1987
IIRC the British and German royal families were intertwined. So there was more than simply admiration, there was kinship.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:46 pm to fr33manator
quote:
IIRC the British and German royal families were intertwined. So there was more than simply admiration, there was kinship.
The British King, German Kaiser, and Russian Czar were all first cousins and grandsons of Queen Victoria.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 8:53 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 8:59 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The British King, German Kaiser, and Russian Czar were all first cousins and grandsons of Queen Victoria.
That's right.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:15 pm to Tigeralum2008
quote:
There would be NO ISRAEL leading to generations of muslims feeling "oppressed" and fueling terror.
Meh. They'd just have a different scapegoat.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 9:39 pm to fr33manator
quote:
The British King, German Kaiser, and Russian Czar were all first cousins and grandsons of Queen Victoria.
That's right.
All three were actually quite close before the war, especially Czar Nicholas of Russia and Kaiser Wilhem of Germany. Here's a picture of the two of them together before the war....
That's the German Kaiser on the left, wearing a Imperial Russian Officer's uniform. And that's the Russian Czar next to him wearing a German Officer's uniform.
Here's another pic...
The guy with the beard, the one who looks a lot like the Czar, that's actually King George V of Great Britain. And that's an Imperial German Officer's uniform he's wearing.
And the uniform swapping didn't end there. Here's another picture...
The guy on the right is King Edward the VII of Great Britain. The guy next to him of course is Kaiser Wilhelm II. Both are wearing the uniform of a British Admiral.
One last pic....
King George V of GB is on the right. Czar Nicolas of Russia is next to him. Both are wearing German uniforms. Again, the resemblance between the two cousins is remarkable.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:00 pm to Darth_Vader
Germany was ill suited to be occupiers, history has shown us this time and time again
We can't assume Germany would have stood on their hands, their natural aggression would have brought them to Mexico and Central America. Which puts them on our doorstep
We can't assume Germany would have stood on their hands, their natural aggression would have brought them to Mexico and Central America. Which puts them on our doorstep
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:03 pm to RollTide1987
quote:completely different situation
. Hitler didn't even want to fight Britain in World War II.
quote:except when they actually were in a war. if you actually think that germany, whose whole foreign policy was shaped around becoming the worlds dominant colonial power for 4 decades, entered into a war with britain, and they then delivered a crushing blow to the british military on the european continent, that they would just say "we like you guys so we arent going to try to accomplish the one thing weve always wanted to achieve for the past 4 decades"? of course not. they may not have wanted to fight a war with england, but once they were in the war and had delivered a crushing blow to the british military on the continent, there is no chance they would just walk away. they would either force the british to conceded colonies AND make the british accept naval restrictions, or they would just outright take their colonies
. They wanted to be the dominant colonial power in the world, to be sure, but they were not willing to go to war with Britain to achieve that goal.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:05 pm to supatigah
quote:
Germany was ill suited to be occupiers, history has shown us this time and time again We can't assume Germany would have stood on their hands, their natural aggression would have brought them to Mexico and Central America. Which puts them on our doorstep
Now that's an interesting idea. I could see this being a possibility if the post-war world developed like I said in my first post ITT, namely with a sort of "cold war" between the British and the Germans developing. I could see both sides looking to extend their power to new spheres of influence. The only problem though would be if Germany were to start gobbling up holdings in South or Central America, that would run afoul of the Monroe Doctrine.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:09 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:this is true
Keep in mind that it was Russia that drew the Ottomans into the war
quote:they did prior to the war. but once the war started, there was a big deal being made about how the british actually straight up took two ottoman battleships that were being repaired in british ports. not to mention the british blockade of the dardanelles. so while prior to the war the ottomans and the english were on pretty good footing, once the war started, it deteriorated quickly
the Ottomans actually had reletevely good relations with the British
quote:their relationship with england had deteriorated, the germans have just routed france and britain, they come to you and tell you that they can return to you the colony of egypt and even MORE shite like sudan. i can see a situation where the ottomans are very interested in that
There's no way the Ottomans would go to war agaisnt Britain just because Germany wanted help in expanding her overseas empire.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:11 pm to Darth_Vader
Once you have a taste for conquering and imperialism it is hard to stop. Especially trying to curtail aggressive military leaders who are winning easily where ever they go.
The Germans were making overtures to Mexico during WWII. We know they intended to be a power in the Western Hemisphere.
Operation Barbarossa ended that fortunately for us.
The Germans were making overtures to Mexico during WWII. We know they intended to be a power in the Western Hemisphere.
Operation Barbarossa ended that fortunately for us.
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:12 pm to WestCoastAg
quote:
they would either force the british to conceded colonies AND make the british accept naval restrictions, or they would just outright take their colonies
1. The British would never agree to any naval restrictions, even if the BEF had been wiped out in France. The only way Germany could have made Britain accept such terms would be if they successfully invaded the Home Islands. And just as Germany lacked the ability to do this in 1940, they likewise lacked the ability to do this in 1914.
2. Germany likewise lacked the ability to take any major British holdings anywhere. As I said before, the German forces available overseas were woefully unprepared to capture really anything. The only way the Germans could do anything would be to move forces from Germany. And to do that, they'd have to get past the British Grand Fleet. The British on the other hand could call on huge reserves of forces from it's colonies and Commonwealth. And in addition to the Grand Fleet at Scapa Flow, the British also had strong naval squadrons around the world, far stronger than anything the German's had. The only place where the Germans had anything close to naval parity with the British was in northern Europe, and even here the balance of power still favored the British. So if there were any overseas holdings that were in danger of being taken, it was actually the German ones that were vulnerable.
This post was edited on 5/9/16 at 10:17 pm
Posted on 5/9/16 at 10:19 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:once again, they wouldnt just walk away from achieving the one thing they had wanted to achieve for 4 decades. they would continue fighting and would do so by attacking their colonies
1. The British would never agree to any naval restrictions, even if the BEF had been wiped out in France. The only way Germany could have made Britain accept such terms would be if they successfully invaded the Home Islands. And just as Germany lacked the ability to do this in 1940, they likewise lacked the ability to do this in 1914.
quote:not necessarily. an alliance with the ottoman empire isnt off the table, nor is the fact that defeating france would most likely net them some african colonies to give them a foothold on the Mediterranean. i dont think the logisitics to the germans fighting the british in africa is really far fetched. they did it in 1940, i can see how they could do it in 1914
The only way the Germans could do anything would be to move forces from Germany. And to do that, they'd have to get past the British Grand Fleet
quote:this actually did happen, so ill grant you this. but if the germans have just annihilated the BEF, have been granted a foothold on the Mediterranean from its victory over france, i can see the germans being able to fight a successful campaign against the british
So if there were any overseas holdings that were in danger of being taken, it was actually the German ones that were vulnerable.
Popular
Back to top



2





