Germany Victorious!

[Thucydides]

This is a CP victory TL. It outlines a thought that the Germans opt to adopt a plan to defend against the French rather then attack through Belgium.

1914
War Breaks out. Countries mobilize against each other, France and Germany included. German troops surge to defend Alsace-Lorraine as French troops surge against them.
The Battle of Luneville on September 6th is the first true example of the horror of trench warfare. Hundreds of thousands of French soldiers are killed or wounded in useless attacks on German lines. Although many field officers urge General Joffre stop attacking the stubbornness of French command prevails. And the attacks continue.
Meanwhile on the eastern front the Germans also maintain a strict defensive tactic awaiting the painfully slow mobilization of the Russian army.
In Britain , Prime Minister Asquith carefully avoids war despite the costly arms race with Germany. He instead turns to the growing Irish problem. Riots in Ulster provoke Asquith to send troops to Northern Ireland.
By December a stalemate will have been achieved on all fronts. This is in favor of Germany who has prepared for a long war.

[stevep]

Originally Posted by Checkmate113

This is a CP victory TL. It outlines a thought that the Germans opt to adopt a plan to defend against the French rather then attack through Belgium.

1914
War Breaks out. Countries mobilize against each other, France and Germany included. German troops surge to defend Alsace-Lorraine as French troops surge against them.
The Battle of Luneville on September 6th is the first true example of the horror of trench warfare. Hundreds of thousands of French soldiers are killed or wounded in useless attacks on German lines. Although many field officers urge General Joffre stop attacking the stubbornness of French command prevails. And the attacks continue.
Meanwhile on the eastern front the Germans also maintain a strict defensive tactic awaiting the painfully slow mobilization of the Russian army.
In Britain , Prime Minister Asquith carefully avoids war despite the costly arms race with Germany. He instead turns to the growing Irish problem. Riots in Ulster provoke Asquith to send troops to Northern Ireland.
By December a stalemate will have been achieved on all fronts. This is in favor of Germany who has prepared for a long war.

Checkmate113

While I would agree that a defensive approach in the west would be good for Germany I can't see them staying on the defensive in the east as well. Foe one thing recent wars, most noticeably those of Germany unification had strongly suggested that the offensive had the advantage and Germany would be unwilling to wait for Russia to mobilise and prepare to attack it. Even more importantly the main Russia attacks would not be against Germany but against Austria as they were in OTL. Austria suffered heavy losses fighting the Russians in Galicia and the Serbs in the south and it was only the distraction of Russian forces northwards at French request and then the German advance into Poland in 1915 that ended that. Germany is not going to win friends or do its reputation much good if the most powerful army in the world sits on its rear while Russia tears its chief ally apart. Also, if you occupy the richest part of Russian Poland before the Russians can fully mobilise you not only deny the Russians those resources and shorten the line in the east you get the chance to inflict casualties on the Russians as they advance into position.

Steve

[General Zod]

Originally Posted by stevep

Checkmate113

While I would agree that a defensive approach in the west would be good for Germany I can't see them staying on the defensive in the east as well. Foe one thing recent wars, most noticeably those of Germany unification had strongly suggested that the offensive had the advantage and Germany would be unwilling to wait for Russia to mobilise and prepare to attack it. Even more importantly the main Russia attacks would not be against Germany but against Austria as they were in OTL. Austria suffered heavy losses fighting the Russians in Galicia and the Serbs in the south and it was only the distraction of Russian forces northwards at French request and then the German advance into Poland in 1915 that ended that. Germany is not going to win friends or do its reputation much good if the most powerful army in the world sits on its rear while Russia tears its chief ally apart. Also, if you occupy the richest part of Russian Poland before the Russians can fully mobilise you not only deny the Russians those resources and shorten the line in the east you get the chance to inflict casualties on the Russians as they advance into position.

Steve

Agreed on that. I also fully expect Italy to join the war on the CP's side very soon if Germany does not invade Belgium and UK stays neutral. I would most likely expect them to declare war on France as soon as this clears out (i.e. in September 1914) but I can also see the reasons for political butterflies delaying it to Spring 1915. Really, no late than that, however. Without UK in the Entente, they have no clear diplomatic tie to the Entente, and the latter looks weaker to Italy, so an Entente Italy is almost ASB. Italian irredentist and colonial claims on France are almost as important in their eyes as those on A-H, and with the CP figthing a defensive war in the West, the obligation on Italy for being true to their standing defensive alliance committments are all the more stringent. Italy can both look good for being true to their old allie, cut down to size a strategic rival and feast on her coveted border territories and colonies, in this situation joining the CP and letting A-H to be dealt with by another generation is just political common sense, so I expect Italy to join the CP in any "Germany goes East" TL as soon as August 1914-May 1915 at the latest.

[Thucydides]

I was planning on having Italy join the CP, but what if Austria had a more competent German commander so they did a lot better against the Russians. But more importantly.

1915
German lines in Alsace-Lorraine hold, the French become incredibley deperate. With the casualty numbers mounting the French public starts demanding another way. In a desperate meeting in Joffre's tent the French high command makes the unbelieveble desiscion of invading Belgium. Britain immediatly rose to defend Belgium and Italy joined the Central Powers as well.
Paul von Hindenburg is called out of retirement to aid the failing Austrian flank. Russia continues to take heavy casualties.
For the Entente things look grim. Due to the invasion of Belgium American support is almost impossible to get.

[Axeman]

I doubt France would be stupid enough to invade Belgium.

Unlike Germany it did not have the urgency of a major logistical strain of a 2 front war against multiple enemies. Italy MIGHT have joined the side of the Central Powers , but even then a French Defensive Posture while it mopped up Colonies , and Consolidated Naval Superiority would be more likely rather then a rash action to earn an entire coastline to defend , and a far flung colonial empire to hold onto compared to British Naval Superiority.

[Thucydides]

Ahhh yes. But the French are so desperate at this point. Many people don't understand that the French needed to win this war. They could not stand another defeat.

[Axeman]

Originally Posted by Checkmate113

Ahhh yes. But the French are so desperate at this point. Many people don't understand that the French needed to win this war. They could not stand another defeat.

Not even the French are that stupid....

EDIT : and the French would hardly be "desperate" by 1915...

[General Zod]

Originally Posted by Axeman

I doubt France would be stupid enough to invade Belgium.

Unlike Germany it did not have the urgency of a major logistical strain of a 2 front war against multiple enemies.

Theoretically true, This does not take into account French rabid revanchist urge to retake Alsace-Lorraine and avenge its loss by whatever means.

Italy MIGHT have joined the side of the Central Powers

That's a BIG understatement. Italy earns little and loses a lot of face by staying neutral. And it lacks any real momentum to join the Entente ITTL.

but even then a French Defensive Posture while it mopped up Colonies , and Consolidated Naval Superiority would be more likely rather then a rash action to earn an entire coastline to defend , and a far flung colonial empire to hold onto compared to British Naval Superiority.

Which consolidated naval superiority, with France alone (with Russian fleets being mostly holed up in closed seas) facing the fleets of Germany, A-H, Italy, and Turkey combined ??? Germany would really not want to provoke Britain by sending the HSF in the English Channel, so a CP naval blockade of France is not really feasible, but Germany can easily send the HSF in the Atlantic through the North Sea and from that link with the other CP fleets, wipe the French from the Mediterranean and play havoc with French commerce.

[ZaphodBeeblebrox]

Originally Posted by General Zod

Theoretically true, This does not take into account French rabid revanchist urge to retake Alsace-Lorraine and avenge its loss by whatever means.



That's a BIG understatement. Italy earns little and loses a lot of face by staying neutral. And it lacks any real momentum to join the Entente ITTL.



Which consolidated naval superiority, with France alone (with Russian fleets being mostly holed up in closed seas) facing the fleets of Germany, A-H, Italy, and Turkey combined ??? Germany would really not want to provoke Britain by sending the HSF in the English Channel, so a CP naval blockade of France is not really feasible, but Germany can easily send the HSF in the Atlantic through the North Sea and from that link with the other CP fleets, wipe the French from the Mediterranean and play havoc with French commerce.

Sounds Like The Entire CP Fleet would be Operating out of Italian Ports, Truly a French Nightmare Come to Bloody Life ...

It's Good that you Have Question Marks Near Turkey; Without Admiral Souchon being Chased out of Messina with a British Squadron in Hot Pursuit, The OE is Unlikely to Provoke Russia without a Similarly Advantageous Incentive ...

As for The Prospect of an Atlantic Blockade, If Italy can Create a Vittorio Veneto-Style Rout All Bets are Off!

[Thucydides]

You people strike a good point so...
1915(REVISED)
German lines hold in Alsace Lorraine. The French take heavy casualties in useless assaults on heavily fortified German positions. French patriotism however is not failing mostly due to propaganda. But as conditions worsen soldiers on both sides begin to ask the inevitable question "Why must we fight this goddamn war". Although French patriotism helps put this out for some the Germans ask the same. Their hopes are not high, they were the only ones not expecting a quick war and were not happy about it. Some are heartened by killing thousands of Frenchmen, but not all the German soldiers are like that...
The Eastern Front is going much better then expected with the help of Hindenburg. Austrian troops under his command are exited at the victories they have been experianceing lately. And with the Russian public becoming increasingly unsupportive the Czar seems oblivious to what seems in impending red tide of Revolution.
In America the US has been giving a healthy dose of Democracy to Mexico. Seeing the revolution as a threat to America the US took the initiative and invaded Mexico. Despite scattered guerilla strongpoints the Americans seem to doing quite well so far. This might not last though...

1916
On the Western Front things have been low key for a while. But Frances position is becoming increasingly desperate and even the French peoples hate for the Germans is failing. The year 1916 would mark the first attempt at armored vehicles by the Germans. The French attempted to match these but simply did not have enough resources. An Italian front was opened early in the year and a German breakthrough seems more likely with French troops being diverted to the Italian border. The end of the year would see a massed German breakthrough, with many more men then the French because of their strategy the Germans made progress fast. The French public became increasingly disheartened, asking for a way to win. And so the French high command began drafting a plan for the unthinkable.
The Austrians stayed on the definsive and watched as the Russian army collapsed. Revolution was coming closer and the fact that the Russians were losing did not have a calming effect. Things were not well in Austria either. THe different ethnic groups have always been unstable and the high casualties are not helping things.
In America the war in Mexico is going well. However the Americans state their true intentions when they state that they will be keeping some Mexican provinces. It turns out that they keep all of them. They then set their eyes on Cuba. Under the false accusation that an American politician who was there was poisoned.

[General Mung Beans]

Excellent TL will you continue this?

[yyz]

Originally Posted by Checkmate113

...This is in favor of Germany who has prepared for a long war.

My excuses but You are completely wrong!!!
1. It was Entente who had more resources and can survive in long run. All that colonies, food and materials.
2. If you would try to know more about pre-WWI strategy and tactics You will learn that ALL countries supposed to win or lose in 3-4 monthes.
3. Germany and Austro-Hungary supposed to mobilize quicker than Allies, defeat France in several weeks, then move through excellent german railways all available forces to East front, defeat Russia.
Read Shliffen and his plan. Moltke was fool to change plan to better Alsace defence and losing a chance to strike with more armies through Belgium and further.
After front stabilizing in autumn 1914 Moltke or some other general said "We lost the war"

[Michael B]

Originally Posted by yyz

My excuses but You are completely wrong!!!
1. It was Entente who had more resources and can survive in long run. All that colonies, food and materials.

The Triple Entente, yes. However if it is just Germany and A-H verse France and Russia then the Central Powers have the economic advantage. Adding Turkey to the Central Powers is no real advantage as the Germans will have to bail them out. Temporary loss of German colonies is not going to influence the outcome. The lack of a blockade by the Royal Navy will allow the Germans to tap resources in the USA and Latin America and so add to their strength compared to OTL.

For their part, the Dual Entente should be able to tap British finance for war loans, British engineering for munitions and the British merchant fleet transport to Britain before transhipment to France and Russia.

In any event I can't see Britain staying out of the war. She was border line when the Germans invaded Belgium so it is only going to take a few incidents to drag her in, say German cruisers intercepting French owned merchant ships using the Union Jack as a flag of convenience!

[yyz]

So no Britain out of WWI.
Britain can live even without Ireland.
But British-German struggle was even more fierce then French-German.

WWI would start even in 1911 - when Britain supported France in Marocco.
Some people said that WWI was prepared when Kiel channel appeared - which let Germany to manouver fleet from Baltic to Northe sea.
Or even earlier when Germany started big naval program of Hochzeeflotte and Britain answered with conception of "2 keels"

[General Zod]

Originally Posted by Michael B

In any event I can't see Britain staying out of the war. She was border line when the Germans invaded Belgium so it is only going to take a few incidents to drag her in, say German cruisers intercepting French owned merchant ships using the Union Jack as a flag of convenience!

No. Without a clear-cut casus belli as the invasion of Belgium, or the HSF entering the English Channel, the Parliament is not going to enter the continental carnage, even less so with the Irish problem broiling. The committment of the nation to the Entente was nowhere that strong. Flimsy fabricated pretexts as the one you describe are not really going to succeed.

Besides that, what the heck is keeping Italy from joining the war for two years ??? This is unrealistic, they ought to join in 1915 at the latest.

[LordInsane]

Originally Posted by Michael B

Adding Turkey to the Central Powers is no real advantage as the Germans will have to bail them out.

You mean as they didn't do in OTL for the Ottoman Empire? Remember, the Ottoman Empire is in a much better position in the case of a neutral Britain, with one front less, and far less of a bother with any Arab Revolt. The Ottomans will be useful- if nothing else, because they make the Bulgarians more likely to join the side of the Alliance, and that would give the Serbians problems.
There's also the issue that the Russians didn't do so super-extremely well in OTL, and they wouldn't be in a better position here, rather the reverse (due to the Ottomans' ability to concentrate on that front to a greater degree).

I can see Britain staying out, but I'd say that merely not going through Belgium would probably only delay it- it should require the French, or the Russians, to do something stupid as well. They'd certainly want a better casus belli then what Michael B suggested, at least.

[Michael B]

On a causus belli to get Britain into the war, German interception of "British" ships may not be enough, but then could General Zod and LordInsane note that on OTL that the death of Americans on the Lusitania pushed the USA in the direction of declaring war on Germany (although it was not the only factor).

At the time the British were worried about the build up of the German High Seas fleet. If it was used in a partial blockade of Franceand her colonies yellow journalists and their editors would have a field day, probably invoking Nelson's name in the process. Britian may not be pro-Entente, but elements of it were certainly anti-German. That would be enough for any incident to push Britain closer if not actually to war.

[LordInsane]

Originally Posted by Michael B

On a causus belli to get Britain into the war, German interception of "British" ships may not be enough, but then could General Zod and LordInsane note that on OTL that the death of Americans on the Lusitania pushed the USA in the direction of declaring war on Germany (although it was not the only factor).

At the time the British were worried about the build up of the German High Seas fleet. If it was used in a partial blockade of Franceand her colonies yellow journalists and their editors would have a field day, probably invoking Nelson's name in the process. Britian may not be pro-Entente, but elements of it were certainly anti-German. That would be enough for any incident to push Britain closer if not actually to war.

I did say that Britain would probably enter the war sooner or later unless either the French or the Russians did something stupid, I just think that there would have to be something more solid for the actual, official reason for going to war, rather then just contributing to a general anti-German feeling.

[stevep]

Guys

A few ideas and suggestions.

a) A French attack through Belgium has been discussed before. Its highly risky at least without some prior agreement with Britain to turn a blind eye, which could well cause political problems in Britain. However if, as they almost certainly would, Germany attacks in Poland then its a lot more likely. With France suffering ruinous losses and making no measurable progress against the A-L fortifications and Russia probably calling for aid - the reverse of OTL situation, then the French might be desperate enough to try something like that. Especially if they thought, rightly or wrongly, that Britain had hinted they would turn a blind eye or that Britain was too tied up in a crisis in Ireland possibly.

b) Not sure about either Italy or Turkey. In TTL its much more favourable for both of them to side with the central powers. Britain will probably, in such an unstable situation, still seek to neutralise the ships being built for Turkey. However what will the Goeben, at least if that or a similar ship is in the Med, do under those circumstances. Even with Italy still neutral and with no British fleet pressurising it, the Germans have far more potential. Presuming a Britain still worried about German influence and its fleet, it would seek to try and keep the Ottomans neutral but OTL Enhva Pasha seemed to have been determined to get Turkey into the conflict on the German side. Its far more in Italy's interests to side with the Germans but they do want those lands from Austria. The other factor to consider was that only 3 years before Italy and Turkey were at war and there might be enough bad feeling that one deciding would prompt the other to go the opposite way.

c) Can't see Germany, even with Italy on its side, doing much to seriously blockage France for two reasons. It has a large battle fleet but relatively little and short-ranged supporting forces. Hence a mission around Britain would mean leaving the ships involved with very little protection from subs or light forces. Also in the Atlantic they have no bases to use while if they go to a friendly Italy they are a long way from home if something goes wrong.

Furthermore if Britain is neutral it, like the US until it joined the war, would emphasise neutral shipping rights. It would want to trade with both sets of combatants, along with affected neutrals such as the Scandinavians and Belgium/Netherlands. Furthermore with the largest merchant marine in the world much of this trade would be in British hulls. Neither side would wish to lose that trade with the outside world or antagonise the most important neutral so unlikely to be much of a trade war.

d) Presuming Russia comes under pressure from a German offensive and possibly a Turkish threat in the Caucasus region it will suffer. However it will do relatively better on the defensive than trying to attack. Also if the German/Austrian forces start advancing into western Russia proper they both the supply lines favour the defending Russians more and there will, at least in the short term, be an upsurge in Russian patriotism. Furthermore the Ottomans had a less than distinguished record in the Caucasus's so probably will not pose too great a threat there. I would expect in a long war they will very likely still go down to defeat, especially without British support. However its not going to be easy to the Germans without major mistakes by either or both allies.

As such the central powers are almost certain to win without a major boost to the allies but its likely to take at least until 1916 and be pretty damned costly in blood and money for both sides.

Steve

[General Zod]

Originally Posted by Michael B

On a causus belli to get Britain into the war, German interception of "British" ships may not be enough, but then could General Zod and LordInsane note that on OTL that the death of Americans on the Lusitania pushed the USA in the direction of declaring war on Germany (although it was not the only factor).

I acknowledge the point. However I would on my turn remark that the unsrestricted submarine warfare Lusitania affair helped create an anti-German mood in the USA, but the Zimmerman telegram was necessary to precipitate it into war. Hence, Germany ought to do something equally stupid and serious to move neutral Britain in war against her.

And for this same reason, LordInsane, I cannot believe a later British entry in the war is a given by any means if Germany leaves Belgium alone; it may well happen, if Germany does something stupid, but this cannot be assumed as a given. Stupidity like unrestricted submarine warfare or the Zimmerman telegram came because Germany felt time was running against her because of the blockade. ITL this is not the case, and if anything, France and Russia are more likely to do something stupid (such as the aforementioned French invasion of Belgium), as time is running against them with this WWI setup.

At the time the British were worried about the build up of the German High Seas fleet. If it was used in a partial blockade of France and her colonies yellow journalists and their editors would have a field day, probably invoking Nelson's name in the process. Britian may not be pro-Entente, but elements of it were certainly anti-German. That would be enough for any incident to push Britain closer if not actually to war.

I utterly fail to see why Britain ought to feel threatened in any way by Germany sending the HSF to link with the Italian, A-H (and possibly Ottoman) fleets and then fight France in the Mediterranean or the Atlantic from Italian ports when there's a declared state of war between Germany and France. If the HSF were sent in the English Channel, sure, that would likely be seen as threatening and would remark well among the acts of stupidity mentioned above, but I really can't believe that some Germanophobe British politicians could ever sell a naval battle between France and the Central Powers in the Mediterranean or the Atlantic as an hostile act against Britain to the British Parliament and public. If HSF is used against France far from the Home Isles, it does not look so threatening to Britain.