AHC/WI: Britain stays out of WW1

How to keep Britain out of the Great War. Irish Home Rule goes through as planned resulting in an Ulster Rising and Army officer mutiny.
 
What does that mean? As in the turn of phrase, I’ve never heard that before.

Broadly means that it took a complete exertion from them and that anything less would have seen them lose.

I hadn't realised that it was phrase quite local to Ireland.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Well the Entente, with the British, were put to the pin of their collar by the Central Powers.

It's arguable that only American intervention allowed the Entente to decisively defeat the Central Powers and inarguable that the British blockade was crucial to weakening Germany.

Therefore, without these factors it's hard to see the Central Powers not grinding out a win through attrition if nothing else.
From a hindsighteering position ... I well agree with you.

Given the OTL performances without the british support in men and weapons at the very beginning the CP might have well managed to fight the french and russians to the negotiation table - US-american participation didn't play a large(r) role till 1916.


But in 1914 ... without hindsight ... IMHO a german/CP-victory looks much less assured :
  • the german army had a "reputation" ... but this stems from a war more than 40 years, almost two generations prior. Since then the german army hasn't been put to the test and the "Kaiser-maneuvers" were only show, as everyone knew ... maybe aside Kaiser Bill himself ...
  • the german armys size (in absolute numbers) was 'only' second by a far and large margin from the numbers of the russian army which had just completed an almost complete, at least very mayor rebuiding and reforming over the last 7 years, standing just before another mayor rebuild or rather upbuild of its forces and its forces capabilities (artillery !!)
  • and on the left side on the Rhein stood an army only marginally smaller than the german army itself, having - though beaten 40 years ago - also quite a reputation of capable fighting. ... and this force it allied with the immense army on the eastern border ...
  • and the sole relaible german ally ... well the A-H-army was known for lack of almost everything : training, men, leqipment (not to speak of the latters 'modernity' and quality). All it had were some 'modern spirited' (aka sticking to french-like aggressiveness) higher officers corps that simply ignored the state of its army, it opponents, the terrains it might have to fight on.
With these conditions being in the strategically ... less good position of being squeezed between the franco-russian alliance it is rather problematic to 'guarantee' a CP-victory without british participation.
... which in the beginning would look not too impressive regarding land-warfare (despite the 'excellency' of thr Brits they simply lacked the nummbers of being counted as decisive).
 

NoMommsen

Donor
...
Not necessarily, it was the violation of Belgian neutrality that brought Britain into the war, not just Germany ‘going West’. If Germany can go West without crossing into Belgium (some sources contend a ‘limited’ violation of neutrality would be accepted) then - as the Cabinet discussions ran OTL - Britain may not get involved.
Though I'm always one arguing for the narrowness of the decision of the Asquith cabinet to finally come to intervention (including military intervention) the question of the extent of a possible (german) violation of belgian territory was almost 'skipped' by the anti-interventionists at the 2nd the evening cabinet-meeting on 2nd August 1914, leaving the principle violation of belgian neutrality and integrity as the official casus belli.
The true concern only concealed by the treaty-talk was the british-friendliness ... or controlability of whatever power, small or large migth sit on the belgian channel-coast.
 

Deleted member 94680

Though I'm always one arguing for the narrowness of the decision of the Asquith cabinet to finally come to intervention (including military intervention) the question of the extent of a possible (German) violation of Belgian territory was almost 'skipped' by the anti-interventionists at the evening cabinet-meeting on 2nd August 1914, leaving the principle violation of Belgian neutrality and integrity as the official casus belli.
The true concern only concealed by the treaty-talk was the British-friendliness ... or controllability of whatever power, small or large might sit on the belgian channel-coast.

Exactly. If the Germans wheel through the south of Belgium only - say no further north than the Sambre/Meuse - than that may give the British discussions a different balance.

Although, a limited violation of Belgium still doesn’t butterfly away a potential Franco-German Race to the Sea. Would this probably still fit the British criteria for intervention?
 

NoMommsen

Donor
...
Not necessarily, ... , not just Germany ‘going West’. If Germany can go West without crossing into Belgium ... then - as the Cabinet discussions ran OTL - Britain may not get involved.
Well ...
Here comes a proposal of a german "western way" and no "going east" without going through Belgium (at least at first).
Alternate_West_1914.jpg
  • "First" german move :
    • redirected advanced parts of 4th Army followed by 5th Army attack directly into France from the Thionville/Metz region in the direction of Montmedy - Verdun - south of Verdun
      • advanced parts of 4th and 5th Army (a reinforced brigade each) IOTL detrained on 3rd August while parts of 4th Army had already their peacetime garrisons there
    • objective might be to break into the 'gap' between Montmedy and Verdun to eventually circumvent Verdun in the north after reinforements (move 2.) have arrived
    • also pls keep in mind that IOTL the french armies - at least thier main bodies - concentrated/were ordered to concentrate 10 kilometers behind the border what would give the germany advancing towards Montmedy quite some advantage
  • "First answering" french move :
    • 3rd, 4th and 5th army are ordered into the aforementioned gap to stop the germans and throw them back
    • alternativly french 5th Army might be ordered to move through southern Belgium to attack into Luxemburg to circumvent the fortress-region or even further north around the german-belgian-luxemburgish Eiffel-mountains (most western parts of the Ardennes)
      • DIFFICULT, DIFFICULT, DIFFICULT ! ... now it would be France ripping the "Fig-Leaf" off the thigh of the Brits ... and be the invader of "poor little" Belgium
    • ofc also the OTL attack into Lorrain and southern d'Alsac by 1st and 2nd Army
  • "Second" german move :
    • as this would be exactly what the whole western german railway system was designed, buit and adjusted for during the last 40 years the remaining 3 german armies in the west will be sent to
      • reinforce 5th army in its fight for entrance into France und circumventing Verdun
      • reinforce the northen AS WELL as the southern pincer of the "Lorrain-Ambush" as even Joffre had called it once IIRC
        • ... only that this time french 1st and 2nd army would have to 'face' the german 6th army as well as another (almost ?) complete army comming down from Metz (not there IOTL) as well as another (almost ?) complete army comming from Strassbourg (also not there IOTL instead of the 1 1/2 6th/7th Army of IOTL
        • means : even worse defeat of the french troops there
 
Top