A French Saarland after the End of World War I

CaliGuy

Banned
What if France would have gotten the coal-rich Saarland (and perhaps Landau as well, since it was a French city until 1815) after the end of World War I?

(For the record, this can be done by having Hughes rather than Wilson win the U.S. Presidency in 1916 and then support a harsher peace on Germany at Versailles in 1919.)

Indeed, my three main questions here are these:

1. Does this butterfly away World War II (due to a weaker Germany)?

2. If World War II still occurs in this TL, does this butterfly away the Fall of France?

3. If World War II still occurs in this TL and the Allies still win World War II in this TL, do the Saarlanders become fully assimilated Frenchmen after the end of World War II like the Alsatians did?

Anyway, any thoughts on all of this?
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Bah, details, details...
If France will annex the entire Rhineland, then it will literally have to deal with a West Bank-type of situation (get it--because the Rhineland is on the west bank of the Rhine? ;) ). Frankly, I strongly doubt that France would actually want that.
 

B-29_Bomber

Banned
If France will annex the entire Rhineland, then it will literally have to deal with a West Bank-type of situation (get it--because the Rhineland is on the west bank of the Rhine? ;) ). Frankly, I strongly doubt that France would actually want that.

I know.

I was joking.
 
Well, I guess they could do the WW2 solution, take the whole Rhineland and just deport all Germans. Vae victus is a distressingly logical way to do things.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Well, I guess they could do the WW2 solution, take the whole Rhineland and just deport all Germans. Vae victus is a distressingly logical way to do things.
That type of solution wouldn't work very well in the Wilsonian post-WWI era, though.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Indeed, even after the end of World War II in our TL, Germans weren't deported en masse from the West.
 
That type of solution wouldn't work very well in the Wilsonian post-WWI era, though.

Really? Seems like it worked wonders in Greece and Turkey. Well, not really, but what matters is that it was done.

Indeed, even after the end of World War II in our TL, Germans weren't deported en masse from the West.

They were from the East, though, and the logic is the same.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Really? Seems like it worked wonders in Greece and Turkey. Well, not really, but what matters is that it was done.

Yes--in poorer, less developed countries. Indeed, good luck having France get away with this and avoid having both Britain and the U.S. be extremely pissed off at it afterwards!

They were from the East, though, and the logic is the same.

Actually, the rules were different in areas which were occupied by the Red Army; after all, the Soviets weren't as civilized as the West was.
 
Yes--in poorer, less developed countries. Indeed, good luck having France get away with this and avoid having both Britain and the U.S. be extremely pissed off at it afterwards!

The U.S. will go back into isolationism no matter what happens - Wilson's incompetence made a certainty out of that. And Britain needs all of the allies they can get to not be irrelevant on the continent. That's the thing about alliances of convenience, they let you get away with a lot so long as you remain valuable to your ally.

Actually, the rules were different in areas which were occupied by the Red Army; after all, the Soviets weren't as civilized as the West was.

They weren't as civilized as the West - except when the West was feeling vindictive. Not only did we come up with the Morganthau Plan, but we were implemented a modified version up until 1947. That's to say nothing of the fact that measures like this and worse would hardly warrant notice if done in a colony somewhere. No, the West's veneer of civilization at this point in time was just that, a mask, and it could be made to slip. I don't think this is all that likely, but the objections really aren't moral ones. And in its way, it's a lot more practical than trying to make an independent Bavaria work.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
The U.S. will go back into isolationism no matter what happens - Wilson's incompetence made a certainty out of that.

That wasn't known yet back during the Versailles Peace Conference, though.

And Britain needs all of the allies they can get to not be irrelevant on the continent. That's the thing about alliances of convenience, they let you get away with a lot so long as you remain valuable to your ally.

Britain can pursue a rapprochement with Germany if France spurns it, though. Indeed, post-WWI Germany might make a decent partner for Britain--at least in the pre-Hitler era.

They weren't as civilized as the West - except when the West was feeling vindictive. Not only did we come up with the Morganthau Plan, but we were implemented a modified version up until 1947. That's to say nothing of the fact that measures like this and worse would hardly warrant notice if done in a colony somewhere. No, the West's veneer of civilization at this point in time was just that, a mask, and it could be made to slip. I don't think this is all that likely, but the objections really aren't moral ones. And in its way, it's a lot more practical than trying to make an independent Bavaria work.

The fact that the Morgenthau Plan was abandoned relatively quickly (specifically within two years) speaks a lot about how vindictive and punitive the West was towards Germany after the end of World War II, though.
 

CaliGuy

Banned
Also, please keep in mind that France was constrained by Britain's restraint in the late 1930s; thus, why exactly wouldn't France likewise be constrained by Britain in 1919?
 
That wasn't known yet back during the Versailles Peace Conference, though.

It's nothing that couldn't be figured out quickly by opening an American newspaper - his popularity wouldn't last long, and his relationship with Congress was already terrible. Plus, a look at possible replacements for the guy in the next couple years would have revealed much less internationalism.

Britain can pursue a rapprochement with Germany if France spurns it, though. Indeed, post-WWI Germany might make a decent partner for Britain--at least in the pre-Hitler era.

A Germany that's still demilitarized and paying reparations has little to offer Britain.

The fact that the Morgenthau Plan was abandoned relatively quickly (specifically within two years) speaks a lot about how vindictive and punitive the West was towards Germany after the end of World War II, though.

It still shows that the vicious instinct is there - and really, it would have lasted a lot longer than two years if there wasn't the danger of West Germany going red.

Also, please keep in mind that France was constrained by Britain's restraint in the late 1930s; thus, why exactly wouldn't France likewise be constrained by Britain in 1919?

Because Britain in 1919 was still led by Lloyd "Hang the Kaiser!" George, who took a harder stance against Germany at Versailles then Clemenceau did. He'd happily look the other way at the time and blame France later when his positions became unpopular, just like OTL. The difference being that at least this part of the Treaty would be a fait accompli by that point, as opposed to reparations or re-armament, which required continual compliance.
 
Top