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?
AHC: Make WWI last as long as possible
- Thread starter Happy Nihilist
- Start date
Keeping the United States out of the war and somehow rendering the blockade's effects on Germany useless is one.
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.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
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
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.
If the Doughboys don’t join, it probably ends in somewhere between a stalemate and a Pyrrhic victory for the Allies. Either way, the Allies will be in no position to punish Germany and no one in Europe is going to be up for a war anytime soon.
The French had a pretty serious problem with mutinies and radical organization within the army earlier in the war and apparently Petain complained that anti-war propaganda from internal French factions was freely available to the troops. From what I've read I think it would have been a struggle to keep the French army as an effective force for another six months. Germany was about the same.
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?
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?
Maybe if you have California flip to Charles Evans Hughes in the 1916 election then with a different President America never enters the war.
Kaze
Banned
There is a theory among some historians that there is no World War Two - that in reality the World War lasted from 1914 to 1945, as for the "all turns to glass era*" in between they ignore it or diminish it to say it was "merely a cease fire."
* - "All turns to glass era"
"All Turns to Glass era" is my term for the interwar period. Imagine a Tiffany lamp gaudy, fragile, ornamental, jazzy, and made of glass - much like the 1920's and early 1930's. Now a black cat comes along whose tail knocks it off the shelf onto the floor - the Stock Market Crash and the rise of nationalism. Now taking off one's shoe to toss it a the cat and curse it for being a jerk = World War Two. Taking out the dust pan and trying to glue the lamp back together = 1950's to 1970's. Giving up and buying a new lamp = 1970's to early 1990's.
* - "All turns to glass era"
"All Turns to Glass era" is my term for the interwar period. Imagine a Tiffany lamp gaudy, fragile, ornamental, jazzy, and made of glass - much like the 1920's and early 1930's. Now a black cat comes along whose tail knocks it off the shelf onto the floor - the Stock Market Crash and the rise of nationalism. Now taking off one's shoe to toss it a the cat and curse it for being a jerk = World War Two. Taking out the dust pan and trying to glue the lamp back together = 1950's to 1970's. Giving up and buying a new lamp = 1970's to early 1990's.
End with an armstice like Korea, so Germany is still technically at war with Communist France, and the DMZ is still a no-man's land.
History Learner
Banned
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.
Last edited:
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.
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.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
I'd argue Germany is more likely to try to knock out Italy first, if only because its closer, easier logistically, and would free up Austria to pick up a greater share of the burdan as well as reopen the flow of food imports from the penninsula. Then push hard on Russia while deploying force multipliers to bolster the Ottoman defenses.
Ian_W
Banned
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.
History Learner
Banned
You're arguing on something that has no relevance to what I was and, to be quite frank, you're making no sense.
for 1918 the German army was a spent force, the German high command knew that when the American states had enough troops attack and his jersey could not hold much, the American army could be more novice but had more supply and much more moral than the German for 1918.
If the United States remains neutral, the war could reach 1919 and there will be a peace because no side can continue the war.
If the United States remains neutral, the war could reach 1919 and there will be a peace because no side can continue the war.
Bolsheviks accepts first Brest-Litowsk offer so eastern front closes december 1917. Then Germany starts major offensive in march-april 1918 and captures large swaths of France maybe even Paris. However Germany doesn't accept any negotiated peace offers so war lingers into 1919.