WI: WW1 Allies Invade Germany

What if the Allies in WW1 invade Germany proper? How would that affect post-war politics?

With or without armistice? - The November 1918 armistice handed over the bulk of German war material to the Entente and their allies. And at the same time, the German army, now that peace was around the corner, was disintegrating rapidly (risking your life for a lost cause is kind of stupid). - But the bulk of the Entente and allied soldiers also expected to go home, sending them - despite the armistice - to occupy Germany might cause some domestic troubles. How things inside Germany would develop is difficult to assess. However, there's a huge window of opportunity for full scale communist revolution. IOTL, the SPD tried to conserve the existing state, ITTL they would be forced to realise that this is impossible. So, they might join forces with Spartacus.

Without armistice, you'll have a German fighting retreat through Northern France and Belgium, destroying much of the infrastructure. The German army would still partially disintegrate, but to a much lesser extend than IOTL. There will be a winter break, in which the Entente and their allies try to approach to new contact - and the Germans crush the Polish insurgency - and possibly also the Czech one.

The 1919 Entente and allied offensive then has a fair chance to meet the Soviet army at the Elbe... in both scenarios.

ThatOneGuy said:

What if the Allies in WW1 invade Germany proper? How would that affect post-war politics?

Click to expand...

They did, under the terms of the Armistice. The entire Rhineland and several bridgeheads east of that river were occupied.

Petian wanted to conduct an offensive into Lorraine in mid 1918 but was held back by Clemeceau. I believe that holding a good chunk of German territory before the Armistice would go a long way toward ended the stab in the back myth.

Riain said:

would go a long way toward ended the stab in the back myth.

Click to expand...

I hardly see a way (in a WW1 scenario) were that myth (or a very similar one) could be avoided.
Chained to a corpse and a very sick man, Germany had fended off three great powers (and a bunch of minors) for more than four years, and only the entry into the war of the US (and half the world with them) had finally brought her down.
That has too much of a classical (or ancient Germanic) hero tale not to be picked up by many.
Whether the hero is - in the end - simply killed or horribly mutilated by the enemy crowd is of rather secondary importance.

How difficult could the Germans have made an invasion in November of 1918? The Germans looked like they were falling apart in early September of 1944 but they were still able to keep the Allies from crossing the Rhine for another 6 months.

MichaelF said:

How difficult could the Germans have made an invasion in November of 1918? The Germans looked like they were falling apart in early September of 1944 but they were still able to keep the Allies from crossing the Rhine for another 6 months.

Click to expand...

And Allied casualties were already horrendous. Iirc, in the last Hundred Days of the war, the British Army lost as many men as in four months of the Battle of the Somme, and the French more than in eight months at Verdun. No way were they going to double this casualty list for the sake of a parade down the Unter den Linden..

One thing I have noticed in multiple threads on this question is the view of 'Germany' as a monlithic political and social entity. However, the Germany Empire of the Great War was a coalition of several kingdoms under the surizainity of the Prussian King & Emperor. The post war attempt of Bavaria to detach itself from 'Germany' was not just a abberation of a Communist government. it reflected a residual sense of independance.

Had the Entente armies crossed the Rhine en mass and marched on to the Elbe and beyond it is possible the state government like Bavaria would have blamed it all on those Prussians, and cut deals with the victors. Such a thing certainly would have been attractive to some British and French politicians, who were busy planning the detachment of chunks of Imperial Germany for Belgium, France, Poland, & Denmark.

Mikestone8 said:

And Allied casualties were already horrendous. Iirc, in the last Hundred Days of the war, the British Army lost as many men as in four months of the Battle of the Somme, and the French more than in eight months at Verdun. No way were they going to double this casualty list for the sake of a parade down the Unter den Linden..

Click to expand...

In the late weeks of October the German soldiers began surrendering or retreating in the face of the Entente armies attacks & casualties dropped significantly. Morale was plunging far faster in the German armies & so was resistance. For Entene casualties to remain at high levels the German soldiers would have to stand and fight, risking their own lives on a similar scale.

rast said:

I hardly see a way (in a WW1 scenario) were that myth (or a very similar one) could be avoided.

Click to expand...

Send their armies home without their weapons and have the Allies hold a victory parade through Berlin instead of allowing the Germans to march home as heroes.

MichaelF said:

How difficult could the Germans have made an invasion in November of 1918? The Germans looked like they were falling apart in early September of 1944 but they were still able to keep the Allies from crossing the Rhine for another 6 months.

Click to expand...

The German morale was at the breaking point in 1918 (Kiel mutiny occurred before the armstice, records from British soldiers showing entire German front line units surrendering), the same was not true of 1944.

RousseauX said:

The German morale was at the breaking point in 1918 (Kiel mutiny occurred before the armstice, records from British soldiers showing entire German front line units surrendering), the same was not true of 1944.

Click to expand...

Kiel Mutiny occurred when a German delegation was at Compiegne asking for one; and since Oct 4 the soldiers had known that their government was suing for peace. Without that their morale is likely to be stiffer - gradually weakening rather than collapsing.

Petian wanted to conduct an offensive into Lorraine in mid 1918 but was held back by Clemeceau. I believe that holding a good chunk of German territory before the Armistice would go a long way toward ended the stab in the back myth.

Click to expand...

Not exactly:
1/ the offensive was supposed to take place on... november the 14th (!)
2/ the idea was from Foch (and came after july 1918)
3/ Clemenceau was not talking to Pétain (he was talking to Foch)
4/ Mid 1918 the idea was just to stop the Germans.