Could trench warfare kept on going virtually in perpetuity? Or would Germany collapse eventually, and if so, when? Or could the Allies have executed a successful flanking manoeuvre?
No. Both sides were near collapse.Could trench warfare kept on going virtually in perpetuity? Or would Germany collapse eventually, and if so, when? Or could the Allies have executed a successful flanking manoeuvre?
No. Both sides were near collapse.
Could the war have continued into 1919? Yes. But I doubt it could last to the end of that year, let alone into 1920.
Russia had already collapsed, Germany was on the brink, and France and Britain weren't far behind. Although Britain's collapse would be mostly financial, where the others could involve social collapses, too.
Could trench warfare kept on going virtually in perpetuity? Or would Germany collapse eventually, and if so, when? Or could the Allies have executed a successful flanking manoeuvre?
Both sides were pretty sick of fighting the war. There were even stories of French battalions taking votes on whether to obey orders well before the war ended. British desertions were at an all-time high. And I don’t recall any specifics about Germany but I can’t imagine it was any better.
Maybe if you have California flip to Charles Evans Hughes in the 1916 election then with a different President America never enters the war.The best way to prolong the war is ensuring that neither side collapses.
Best bet is: USA remains neutral and a fleet actions results in the destruction of mostly both the german and british fleets living the USA as unquestionably the dominant naval power. After that they decide that Brittain doesnt have the right to stop their trade with Germany and Brittain is not in a position to challenge that. So the USA sells food etc to Germany as well as the Antant. If Russia could be efficiently supplied as well it would make things last even longer.
It all ends with finally the USA brokering a peace - and have everydody pay for what they sold them during the war.
But as pointed out, it still couldnt last much longer than 1919 and reaching 1920 would be a miracle.
A question: AFAIK for the CP the food situation was by far the most critical. What would happen if this -and only this - was solved to their satisfaction. How long could they continue?
Good point about strategies. If both sides realize that offense in a trench war situation is massive pain for little gain, and both sides largely sat back in their trenches, just making token raids to test the opposition occasionally, the war could last quite a bit longer.This, assuming roughly similar grand strategy developments on both sides. Perhaps if the French adopt a "Phoney War" stance early on that dosen't result in the Russians taking their ball and going home in disgust, you can reduce casulty rates and resources expeditures on the Western Front to a slow enough rate to lengthen the resulting war into, say, early 1920 and a compromise peace as France and GB run out of secure assets and credit, but that's about it
In this scenario, Britain's going to push harder on the periphery, e.g. try harder at Gallipoli. Don't know what the Germans can do - probably push harder against Russia until the latter collapses.
Ludendorff doesn't have a mental breakdown at the end of September in 1918 and the fighting will definitely last into 1919. Certainly not beyond that, however.
Horseshit.
If Luddendorf doesnt have his attack of stupid and cripple the Line divisions to create elite troops, and stays on the defensive ready to counter attack, then the German Army doesnt lose every battle between June and November 1918.
It's really hard to convince the enemy they are losing and should offer a peace when you are losing every battle.
You're arguing on something that has no relevance to what I was and, to be quite frank, you're making no sense.