AHC: Prolong WWI

With PoDs as late as possible -- preferably not before October 1918 -- how can the Great War contnue, either for another year or until Germany surrenders unconditionally (and/or are militarily occupied, etc)? Maybe the German Revolution proceeds differently, maybe Germany walks out of Versailles, or maybe something else.

From what I understand, no one was in a position to continue the fighting except for the United States. Germany was starting to run into a manpower wall, had civil unrest at home, and had difficulties feeding itself. France was utterly trashed and the only reason the army is not mutinying anymore is because America is now in the fight and France is receiving loans from the British again. Britain is becoming exhausted, its economy is in shambles, but is now receiving a lot of aid and loans from America to keep it in the fight. Russia was already out, and Austria-Hungary was one step away from fully collapsing.

Given the situation, I'm pretty sure everyone saw the writing on the wall at that point. There would have been no victory beyond a negotiated surrender that anyone was willing to pay the cost for. Totally defeating Germany would likely incur an immense amount of casualties and would require men they did not have (in the case of France), or would not wish to lose (Britain and America).

It's debated how "on the cusp" of revolution Germany was and how much of it had to do with battlefield realities vs the homefront. That said, it is interesting thinking of only the US having the will to keep fighting; if Germany found the will and/or the way to keep going, the effects on France and (to a lesser extent) Britain would be profound, as well as Germany.

The Great War could have only lasted a few more months, at best.

Perhaps by adding other nations to the conflict? Bringing the Soviets back in somehow? Or perhaps by getting a few of the factions at the early emergence of the Chinese Warlord Era (the Anhui clique, Zhili clique, Fengtian clique and the Chinese Revolutionary Party) to officially enter the conflict, declaring for the Entente and Central Powers respectively (giving the Chinese factions diplomatic recognition, along with assistance in military, industrial and technical matters; in exchange for giving them limited access to Chinese manpower (labor), favorable trade deals for raw materials and foodstuffs critical to the war effort, and sufficient cash to keep the war effort going)? Effectively, the Warlord Era becomes the Chinese theater of The Great War, and the Great War ITTL is only acknowledged to have come to an end when the Chinese Warlord Era ends, with China's reunification under the single national government of the victorious faction (/s).

John Fredrick Parker said:

It's debated how "on the cusp" of revolution Germany was and how much of it had to do with battlefield realities vs the homefront. That said, it is interesting thinking of only the US having the will to keep fighting; if Germany found the will and/or the way to keep going, the effects on France and (to a lesser extent) Britain would be profound, as well as Germany.

Click to expand...

In 1918, it was at the point where only the United States was fresh, and Germany and the British Empire could have pushed things if needed, but if they did so, it is likely that they would have done a decent amount of permanent damage to their nation France could have continued on paper, but in reality it was a soulless husk, those French troops would not be going anywhere and would likely be held in a reserve capacity if push comes to shove. I can't imagine that the war would last beyond 1919, maybe early 1920 at the latest.

GeneralBoomstick said:

In 1918, it was at the point where only the United States was fresh, and Germany and the British Empire could have pushed things if needed, but if they did so, it is likely that they would have done a decent amount of permanent damage to their nation France could have continued on paper, but in reality it was a soulless husk, those French troops would not be going anywhere and would likely be held in a reserve capacity if push comes to shove. I can't imagine that the war would last beyond 1919, maybe early 1920 at the latest.

Click to expand...

I really like the idea of a French "collapse" in 1919; are we likely talking mutinies, riots, what? And what kind of permanent damage does the British Empire and Germany see? I imagine the peace will be worse for the latter, maybe even seeing occupation?

Historyman 14 said:

The Great War could have only lasted a few more months, at best.

Click to expand...

OK, if the armistice could be delayed until late July, I'd accept that as well.

What if you had the war be less bloody? What were the chances of the various military leaderships being more open to innovations in response to these new technologies? If you didn't have the horrible combination of incredibly outdated tactics with incredibly advanced and deadly technology, perhaps the various powers wouldn't have been so heavily drained by 1918.

Maybe just before Germany officially seeks an armistice there's an offensive that somehow infuriates the Entente, so they decline an armistice and go for a "unconditional surrender" type of deal, or something Germany perceives as such.
Then you can have Germany revitalized, at least again supporting the war effort, by claiming they wanted peace, but the evil Entente wants to conquer and erase them or something.

John Fredrick Parker said:

I really like the idea of a French "collapse" in 1919; are we likely talking mutinies, riots, what? And what kind of permanent damage does the British Empire and Germany see? I imagine the peace will be worse for the latter, maybe even seeing occupation?



OK, if the armistice could be delayed until late July, I'd accept that as well.

Click to expand...

The French army mutinying was what was happening before the US entry into the war. With the entry of the Americans, morale was boosted enough that it stopped for the most part from what I've read. Without heavy British support, France would have already collapsed before then.

The permanent damage I speak of is the economic and demographic kind. The British Empire sold off a lot of its assets to finance the war. This caused a lot of economic damage later on. It was bad enough where the United States had to forgive a lot of the British debt in the 20's in order to lessen the economic strain. Germany managed to finance the war effort on its own so far, but I'm skeptical that it could continue to do so. Germany was also having issues with finding available manpower I believe.

I've read many scenarios on this website that advocates for the occupation of Germany after the first world war like it was with the second, but I simply do not think it would have been a feasible option at the time. Any complete occupation of Germany would require a total victory. Britain and France simply do not have the capability to do so, and America would not be willing to suffer the casualties to do so (the populace is still iffy about the war back home as they do not share the same enthusiasm about this "European War" as they did about WW2). And the treaty is unlikely to be more harsh. Britain wants Germany humbled, but still able to keep the Russians from getting any grandiose ideas. France pretty much wants Germany destroyed with large portions of it being annexed into France, but that's not going to happen and no one really gives a damn about what the French want at this point.

GeneralBoomstick said:

The French army mutinying was what was happening before the US entry into the war. With the entry of the Americans, morale was boosted enough that it stopped for the most part from what I've read. Without heavy British support, France would have already collapsed before then.

Click to expand...

Like the Nivelle Offensive, correct? Though I'd heard it described as more of a "strike" than a rebellion.

POD: Wilhelm II begins patriot rallies in Germany in June 1917.
"This inspires some 12,000 German youth to join the military alongside 13,000 other civilians. With this help, the Spring Offensive is successful and Paris is captured in May of 1918. Wilhelm puts his nephew, Prince Sigismund, as Governor General of France. Sigismund was forced to round up the fleeing government. The French president, Raymond Poincaré, was captured in the skirmishes after the fall of Paris on May 11, 1918. Georges Clemenceau, the Prime Minister, was caught in the French countryside on May 23, 1918. On May 24, both signed the Treaty of German Wurzui, in which Luxembourg and former German Confederation Belgium were annexed alongside the remainder of Alsace-Lorraine. Also at Wurzei, some eight billion francs were to be paid to Prussia. Wurzei, previously known as Versailles, was given to Prince Sigismund. The German troops were officially demobilized on June 1, 1918. 25% of the non-conscripted army was given a week's leave on June 2. On June 10, another quarter gained a week's leave. On June 18, the third quarter gained one week's leave. The last quarter was given eight days of leave on June 26 in reward for their patience. All came back invigorated. Every other month became like this until the end of the war, when 80% of the army was given one month's leave after the other 20% got two week's leave.

Eventually, the French fighting came to an end in April 1919, when they A. Agreed to support the Prussians against the British and Americans as regarded colonies and B. Handed French Indochina and Central Africa, including Nigeria, over to Germany in exchange for the forgival of three billion francs from the reparations. Germany eventually forgave another three billion francs in exchange for granting Sigismund the throne of France.

Sigismund brought a conclusion to the Endless War on May 3, 1920 when he negotiated a peace between all the sides present. Germany purchased Hong Kong with the equivalent of one and a half billion Francs. It also agreed to paying the British and American governments the equivalent of half a billion francs.

Sigismund married his cousin, Grand Duchess Olga, in June of 1918, when his prospects were looking up. In 1920, he also had his first son whom he christianed Nicholas after the child's deceased grandfather. By December 21, 1921, he had a daughter named Alexandrina after his aunt. Sigismund would rule until 1991, when he died from a heart attack on learning his dear "Princess Olga" was dead. However, she bore him two more sons and four daughters before then. In 1942, his son became Count of Paris and Lord Protector of France. By 1992, he was ruling in name alone, and yet half the world mourned to hear of his death. The Sigismundan Era, the last link to the Victorian Era, as at an end. However, Morocco, Guyana, Algeria, and mainland France had loyalty to the monarchy still. Today, in 2014, Nicholas rules as King of France and Count of Moscow. His younger siblings, Henry and William, rule Russia together. We hardly know what the future has in store except for that 40 year-old Nicholas II is destined to become King of France..." - an excerpt from The Victorian Era through the Sigismundan Era.

sorry I'm confused where was Germany going to find a field army with the dynamism needed to stop the rampant allied combined arms advances taking place in late 1918, given that they were moving onto intact lines of communication there is no doubt a winter offensive could have been maintained with British and US forces into Germany proper.

they just didn't have the numbers after Kaiserslacht to counter balance the force multipliers the British Empire was deploying in 1918.

Well, it looks like seriously extending the war with such a late PoD isn't regarded as plausible on this board; and if we're going with an earlier PoD, I'd be partial to discussions here anyway.

actually the disagreement is in whether the allies could prosecute an offensive into Germany proper. which would probably take the first few months of 1919 to complete.

so the pod would be with German high command not throwing in the towel.

You all seem to be ignoring my answer to the challenge, and I believe the POD is as late as possible. The Spring Offensive could have made the game instead of breaking it. At the beginning of 1918, each side was exhausted. French troops were deserting every day in the hundreds. Take into account the fall of Paris and that number would go to extreme heights. In my scenario, the Americans would see a lack of popularity with the war at home as France began selling more of its products to Germany and Austro-Hungary. There is very little chance of America staying in the war by itself.

Kingpoleon said:

POD: Wilhelm II begins patriot rallies in Germany in June 1917.
"This inspires some 12,000 German youth to join the military alongside 13,000 other civilians. With this help, the Spring Offensive is successful and Paris is captured in May of 1918.

Click to expand...

25,000 troops in an army of 5 million change a bloody tactical victory and strategic defeat into a decisive German victory?

Bad@logic said:

25,000 troops in an army of 5 million change a bloody tactical victory and strategic defeat into a decisive German victory?

Click to expand...

25,000 childeren and undertrained troops apparently.

If you can somehow end Verdun before the Somme starts you can save possibly more than a million casualties on both sides.

If possible, I'd like to focus on 1918 PoDs (since the OP's "no earlier than October" is, in retrospect, really too strict).

One other idea is the Vardar Offensive being less successful.

Another -- apparently at the Second Paris Conference (October 29 to November 6), the Allies almost reached an impasse, which might have dragged out negotiations.

And another -- supposing the new German naval commanders didn't push for a suicidal attack on British ships; this might have prevented the naval mutinies that became the German Revolution.

Going with an earlier PoD, there's also a more successful Spring Offensive, which not only prolongs the war but allow the CP to win a brutal peace.

On that subject, here's another though -- if the Battle of Vittorio Veneto isn't a couple rout for the Austro-Hungarians, could Italy have "collapsed" before their adversary? The Battle of Caporetto showed Italy having a pretty bad case of the "Russian disease" (as David Kennedy called it).