AHC; Belgiumwank

The fact that the Nord Département is essentially the pieces of the Counties of Flanders and Hainaut that were ceded by the Habsburgs to Louis XIV and that there is a north-western part of France speaks Flemish!?

And . . . that has what to do with the costs vs. rewards of fighting France are?
 
And . . . that has what to do with the costs vs. rewards of fighting France are?

The cost? With The entire German Empire fighting an outnumbered France, the cost wouldnt be that high. Especially not if you could persuade Britain to join

The Rewards? one of France's most important Industrial areas; the most heavily populated department of France; France's only coal mines; Lille, Douai, Cambrai and Valenciennes as important cultural areas; 2 extra universities in Lille and Douai; France's third-largest harbor Dunkirk

He seems like one of those nationalistic "sacred soil of x-land" types.

Nop, I just wanna make a Belgiumwank... If someone gives Alsace, Lorraine and Burgundy to Germany in a Germanwank or Normandy and Brittany to Britain in a Britwank nobody says anything. But make Belgium greater and you unleash the fury of the internet upon you it seems...
 
The cost? With The entire German Empire fighting an outnumbered France, the cost wouldnt be that high. Especially not if you could persuade Britain to join

Yes, because France will promptly forget about the fact Belgium did that after signing over this area of territory. Britain will continue to see Belgium the same way as OTL . . . absolutely no long term consequences.

Yeah, no. Say hello to Belgium having to hope and pray that France has bigger problems, and find a big anti-French, probably pro-German (if not Germany itself) ally to protect its seizure of this area.

Britain is not going to support Belgium here unless Anglo-French hostility gets much worse than OTL. Either in the short term or the long term.

So if we have a WWI like OTL (your butterfly-free scenario), Belgium won't be getting pieces from Germany, Belgium will be forced to give this back to France the same way things were taken from Germany.

The Rewards? one of France's most important Industrial areas; the most heavily populated department of France; France's only coal mines; Lille, Douai, Cambrai and Valenciennes as important cultural areas; 2 extra universities in Lille and Douai; France's third-largest harbor Dunkirk
Also: And France will agree to give this up why?

Belgium doesn't have the muscle to do it on its own, and Germany has no reason to want it given to Belgium - those concerned with it being too much to demand it for Germany are trying a softer peace than OTL, those not concerned will not want it going to someone else.

It's not impossible, but it doesn't seem very likely.
Nop, I just wanna make a Belgiumwank... If someone gives Alsace, Lorraine and Burgundy to Germany in a Germanwank or Normandy and Brittany to Britain in a Britwank nobody says anything. But make Belgium greater and you unleash the fury of the internet upon you it seems...
People regularly "say something" in regards to Germanwanks or Britwanks. And I hardly think that people pointing out Belgium is not in a good position to be wanked is furious hostility.
 
Why not make Belgium, an area where the descendants of Marie Antoinette and her husband rule, basically a French version of Taiwan and it has regions that are taken from France..
 
Yes, because France will promptly forget about the fact Belgium did that after signing over this area of territory. Britain will continue to see Belgium the same way as OTL . . . absolutely no long term consequences. Yeah, no. Say hello to Belgium having to hope and pray that France has bigger problems, and find a big anti-French, probably pro-German (if not Germany itself) ally to protect its seizure of this area. Britain is not going to support Belgium here unless Anglo-French hostility gets much worse than OTL. Either in the short term or the long term.

How about the alliance between Belgium and Britain that was part of the 1831 Conference of London? Also if the Great Powers were 'upset' that they lost a strong Bufferstate against France (The United Kingdom of the Netherlands), wouldnt they have accepted that Belgium is an acceptable bufferstate against France by the 1860's that they would silently give permission for it to get stronger and weaken France?

France having bigger problems that Belgium taking lands from them... how about Germany's annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, the diplomatic isolation it found itself in untill 1894, The Paris Commune, The Dreyfus affair, the Paris Bourse crash of 1882 that sent France careening into depression, The scramble for Africa,The Fashoda Crisis in 1898, ...

So if we have a WWI like OTL (your butterfly-free scenario), Belgium won't be getting pieces from Germany, Belgium will be forced to give this back to France the same way things were taken from Germany.

Why would we, after 4 years of German occupation of around 80% of Belgium, be forced to give things back to France, who is fighting against the same Germans!?
 
Last edited:
How about the alliance between Belgium and Britain that was part of the 1831 Conference of London? Also if the Great Powers were 'upset' that they lost a strong Bufferstate against France (The United Kingdom of the Netherlands), wouldnt they have accepted that Belgium is an acceptable bufferstate against France by the 1860's that they would silently give permission for it to get stronger and weaken France?

What about an alliance from forty years earlier is going to make a country that made a point of having no permanent friends, only permanent interests, want to see Belgium gain at France's expense?

And no, because they have no reason to see this as keeping things balanced or in their favor.

France having bigger problems that Belgium taking lands from them... how about Germany's annexation of Alsace-Lorraine, the diplomatic isolation it found itself in untill 1894, The Paris Commune, The Dreyfus affair, the Paris Bourse crash of 1882 that sent France careening into depression, The scramble for Africa,The Fashoda Crisis in 1898, ...
And none of those, barring Belgium having an ally that would fight France over France attempting to retake something Belgium has no recognized claim to, are going to stop France from taking the area back - so having 'bigger problems" doesn't prevent dealing with this one.

And France's situation is not one long slog of negativity for two decades.


Why would we, after 4 years of German occupation of around 80% of Belgium, be forced to give things back to France, who is fighting against the same Germans!?

A Belgium that cozies up to Prussia to gain this area has a great deal of interest in retaining Germany's friendship as a counter to France's desire to take that area back.

You can't massively change the actions involving a country and its relations to its neighbors and have it in the same diplomatic position as it was OTL forty years after the change (later, if we count from the original POD, but that gets more into butterfly theory than setting up the blocks differently).
 
I told you to prepare yourself with massive hostility BryanIII. Because Belgianwank are even more hated then Frenchwank on this board.
Napoleon III wanted to annex Belgium and try his luck there might be a way to get reparation if the other garantors of the treaty of London get involved to defend Belgium.
 
Last edited:
I told you to prepare yourself with massive hostility BryanIII. Because Belgianwank are even more hated then Frenchwank on this board.
Napoleon III wanted to annex Belgium and try his luck there might be a way to get reparation if the other garantors of the treaty of London get involved to defend Belgium.

I can only speak for myself, but I don't feel any "massive hostility" for BryanIII or Belgium.

"Belgium gets a significant piece of France, then nearly fifty years later adds on a piece of Germany after a war where it is treated the same as OTL" is asking for Belgaephilia on the part of the other powers.

If finding that highly improbable makes me "hostile", my reaction to wanks of Crusaders or Romans or Germans must be positively pathological.
 
Last edited:
Interesting, could work... a 1815 Congress of Vienna that was more punitive for France in general maybe? Making them cede the Nord Département to the United Kingdom of the Netherlands. But why would there be major butterflies when the United Kingdom of the Netherlands would gain Le Nord!?

Yes, perhaps Napoleon succeeds in the Battle of Waterloo, but then is inevitably anihilated afterward by the Coalition of Russians, Austrians and Prussians coming from the east. This could lead to overall more punitive measures against France, though the substantial British influence means France isn't totally hammered, or something.

Anyway the butterfly would be France losing a piece of its land, something France never liked happening. Even something as small as 'French Flanders' would annoy the French, so would France be as willing to support Belgian independence, and even if it did, would it force the new nation to hand over their previous land (perhaps purchasing it).
 
Yes, perhaps Napoleon succeeds in the Battle of Waterloo, but then is inevitably anihilated afterward by the Coalition of Russians, Austrians and Prussians coming from the east. This could lead to overall more punitive measures against France, though the substantial British influence means France isn't totally hammered, or something.

Or him taking longer time to escape from Elba, catching a sickness or something (just thinking and typing at the same time). The Great Powers thinking the French threat has subsided and peace and stability have returned to Europe. And when he eventually does come back the it took the Great Power off guard, which gave the French the element of surprise and maybe have more success initially.

Maybe afterwards they were a bit more punitive or 'cautious' with France. Maybe undoing France from the conquest made by Louis XIV; Roussillon to Spain, Corsica to Piedmont-Sardinia, Le Nord to United Kingdom of the Netherlands, Alsace to Baden or Prussia, Franche Comte to Switzerland!?, Maybe even Calais to Britain to accommodate a 'peaceforce' under Wellington's command. Returning France back into its Medieval shape more or less. But that might be thinking to far perhaps!

Anyway the butterfly would be France losing a piece of its land, something France never liked happening. Even something as small as 'French Flanders' would annoy the French, so would France be as willing to support Belgian independence, and even if it did, would it force the new nation to hand over their previous land (perhaps purchasing it).

Yes, thats true. But a divide as stated above would make a France that is annoyed with every neighbor he has, and he knows that he could not be able to take them all again. I imagine they would still support a Belgian revolution, as they were hoping the officially Frenchspeaking Belgium would ultimately fall into French hands and they saw it as a weakening of on of their bufferstates. Demanding land back certainly sound like something France would do, and maybe even succeed. But the Belgian kings would still have the ambition to take it back. Just like the 2 first OTL kings had the ambition to retake Dutch Limburg and Zeelandic Flanders (which rebelled along with the the rest of Belgium but where given back to the Dutch by the London Conference)
 
In such a scenario, you might see Belgium, taking Zeelandic Flanders, Dutch (East) Limburg and North Brabant from the Dutch, they could also take the rest of the grand duchy of Luxembourg (Belgium already got the Western part). Or does Belgium desire more from the Netherlands? (In any Dutchwank we probably never lose Belgium (king Willem I's failure) or retake it ;-).)
And yes, Belgium could retake those lands the Southern (Spanish later Austrian) Netherlands lost to France.
Though it would naturally increase the hostility of neighbouring countries.
 
In such a scenario, you might see Belgium, taking Zeelandic Flanders, Dutch (East) Limburg and North Brabant from the Dutch, they could also take the rest of the grand duchy of Luxembourg (Belgium already got the Western part). Or does Belgium desire more from the Netherlands? (In any Dutchwank we probably never lose Belgium (king Willem I's failure) or retake it ;-).)
And yes, Belgium could retake those lands the Southern (Spanish later Austrian) Netherlands lost to France.
Though it would naturally increase the hostility of neighbouring countries.

Well, Dutch Limburg (with the exception of Maastricht) and the whole of Luxemburg rebelled along with the rest of Belgium and was officialy part of Belgium until 1839. Then it was returned to you to finally make Willem I accept Belgian Independence.
Belgique_1830.jpg


Around 1855 Crownprince Leopold II had plans to invade Holland For Nord-Brabant and Zeelandic Flanders as well as the parts returned to the Dutch in 1839. And apparently he wanted Borneo also!? Details about this plan can be found here (its in Dutch but since I see that you're from The Netherlands that wont be a problem I presume? :p); http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_II_van_België#Plannen_voor_een_aanval_op_Nederland
 
I don't mind a Belgium wank, but since it generally goes at the expense of the Netherlands they are not my favourite, but then again I am Dutch AND a Flemish sympathiser ;)


A Belgium Wank could also work by having the the BeNeLux formed instead of Belgian independence with the North an independent nation and the South as well with Luxembourg tagging allong. The colonies should then be property of the Union instead of the North. A nation such as that aiding the Prussians would be quite capable of taking Nord Pas du Calais I'd think. But then we need to find a way to get the whole union to speak Dutch instead of French still ( :D :rolleyes: ) though that could be done by education and mutual animosity between the Union and France. Another option could be to have the Language border be the border for a Flanders/Brabant style nation (West Vlaanderen, Oost Vlaanderen, Antwerpen, Noord Brabant, Limburg, Zuid Brabant) within such a union. Thus having the Netherlands, Flanders/Brabant, Luxemburg and Wallonia.

The international name for this Union should then be Belgique (diplomatic language was French at the time)
 
Last edited:
Belgium, like Canada, is an immensely difficult country to wank, both for the dual (prevailing) cultural composirion of the state as well as its relative youth. Much like any Canadawank with a POD before 1867 realy creates a different county, so does any Belgiumwank with a POD before 1830. The problem thus for Canada is the same as for Belgium; there are not many options for significant expansion.
 
Be ready for the "Belgium is an artificial creation".

Well, for much of modern Belgium was a classic case of an area that had almost no agency of its own-it was passed from the Spanish to the Austrians to the Dutch and only became its own country in 1830. As several people have pointed out, its very difficult to wank Belgium and still have it be recognizable as "Belgium".

My stab at it-in the 1580's-1590's, the Spanish have an insane run of luck that enables them to completely stomp the Dutch revolt and retake the entire Netherlands. Much of the (OTL) Netherlands is devastated by war, and most of Amsterdam's Calvinist merchant community flee (or are deported by the Spanish), with the majority ending up in Hamburg or Lubeck. This influx of moneyed immigrants enables these two cities (in conjunction with Sweden) to effectively take over Amsterdam's old share of the Baltic trade. Within a few generations, the Jesuits and the Inquisition re-Catholicize the Netherlands (the same way Flanders was IOTL). Eventually, Spain gives the Netherlands to a junior branch of its royal family.

The result is a united Belgium+Netherlands+Luxembourg. While it probably won't be called Belgium in English, it will be politically and economically dominated by the territory of OTL Belgium (Brussels will probably be its capital, and its economic center will stay in Antwerp), and it will probably culturally resemble Belgium a great deal, except dominated by Flemings.
 
Finally someone mentions a pre-1800 PoD. What about 1789? The French Revolution isn't the only one that year, the Belgians revolted against the Austrians too. Let Belgium keep its pre-1792 borders, and there's your road to Fritewank
 
Aegidius outlives (or outfights) Childeric, and Clovis never becomes king of the Salian Franks.
Instead Aegidius son Syagrius, is recognised as legitimate overlord.
Given the religious rift between the Frankish leaders and their own population not entirely inplausible.
The Armorican Bretons ( already staunch allies) are slowly and willingly assimilated into a Belgica 'Superior' that encompasses the former Roman provinces of Belgica I & II, and all of the Lugdunesis ones.

'Belgica' now stretches from Vienna to Nantes to Antwerp.


How this entity will survive into the Middle Ages I leave up to someone else.
 
Top