Alternate WW I, England joins Central Powers

Best butterfly would to have the King and the Kiser spend a lot of time together when they're younger.If they develop a good working relationship, England might side with Germany.It would help if Napoleon II did something stupid.
 
If Germany hadn't wasted so much money on the navy, which was directly viewed as a threat towards the United Kingdom and instead spent the money on improving the army in terms of additional heavy and conventional artillery, additional machineguns, more troop formations and generally better training they wouldn't have drew the ire of the British. When the war goes down the Germans dig in and the French bleed themselves on massive bloody attacks into Alsace Lorraine losing hundreds of thousands. After continual failure to breach German lines the French command resorts to extreme measures, crossing Belgian territory to attempt to attack Germany's flank. However without strong rail coverage logistics fail and after several notable defeats, the French army attacks and occupies Belgium. British public opinion swiftly turns against France as German diplomats spread stories of French atrocities. I think the most likely option is that Britain stays out of the war, however it's theoretically possible that they join the CP especially if they get thirsty for French colonies. If England joins the CP they deploy the BEF in Germany but mostly let the RN and colonial troops loose on the French colonies. The French have made small gains attempting to urge forward to Cologne and experience their strongest successes in 1917 after the alternate Brusilov offensive occurs. However in 1918 the Germans pierce the French lines and begin pushing into Belgium and into French territory. Germany troops are transferred after Brest Litovsk to France and end up besieging and capturing Paris in the Summer of 1918. The French government is forced to come to turns but violent communist revolution, influenced by the Bolsheviks overtakes the French regime. France ends up losing losing buffer territory.
 
So, by that timeline should the French invade Belgium and fail and the British start turning on them, Russia and France's best bet at that point is to recognise they cannot win, make peace with Germany, then turn and with Germany and Italy, carve up the perfidious British, correct?
 
So, by that timeline should the French invade Belgium and fail and the British start turning on them, Russia and France's best bet at that point is to recognise they cannot win, make peace with Germany, then turn and with Germany and Italy, carve up the perfidious British, correct?

It would have made sense in the original timeline to stop the war in the first place, it was massively expensive and destructive. France lost 1/10th of it's adult male population, French society never recovered for over half a century. The problem was that the leaders and nationalists irredentist forces demanding the war continue. In this timeline France would have fought to the end.
 
Best butterfly would to have the King and the Kiser spend a lot of time together when they're younger.If they develop a good working relationship, England might side with Germany.It would help if Napoleon II did something stupid.
The very best butterfly, which is a virtual space bat, involves Queen Victoria being predeceased by both her remaining sons. Since one had a permanently reserved suite in a Parisian Brothel, why he didn't die young of a social disease is an almost act of ROB. Her other son was a veteran soldier, a stray round or tropical disease will suffice.
At which point the line of succession runs through her eldest daughter, and to her grandson Wilhelm II. With a personal union of the crowns it is hard to see Britain and Germany not on the same side in WW1.
 
The very best butterfly, which is a virtual space bat, involves Queen Victoria being predeceased by both her remaining sons. Since one had a permanently reserved suite in a Parisian Brothel, why he didn't die young of a social disease is an almost act of ROB. Her other son was a veteran soldier, a stray round or tropical disease will suffice.
At which point the line of succession runs through her eldest daughter, and to her grandson Wilhelm II. With a personal union of the crowns it is hard to see Britain and Germany not on the same side in WW1.
It more then that it would require all of her sons (all 4 not just the two who outlived her) plus all of there children as any of those children is ahead of the Empress( interestingly if Edward Prince of Whales died with no children Marie of Romania would have been queen on Victoria's death) I would also wonder if Parilment would accpect a situation which would lead to the German Emperor being king I would expect that by 1900 in would not be seen as a good move and an act would somehow bypass Wilhelm
 
I am sorry, I should of used the UK or British Empire. Please excuse an American for using the wrong term.
Don't worry about it. As said above the British still call the Netherlands 'Holland' and the French also colloquially refer to anyone from the British Isles (including the Irish) as 'Anglais'. Mind you, woe betide you if you send a letter to the UK from France and don't address it to 'Royaume Uni'!
 
It more then that it would require all of her sons (all 4 not just the two who outlived her) plus all of there children as any of those children is ahead of the Empress( interestingly if Edward Prince of Whales died with no children Marie of Romania would have been queen on Victoria's death) I would also wonder if Parilment would accpect a situation which would lead to the German Emperor being king I would expect that by 1900 in would not be seen as a good move and an act would somehow bypass Wilhelm

I suppose I should have specified all of her sons pre-deceasing her without issue. Since Alfred visited so many prostitutes sterility, and early demise, caused by an STD is not implausible, Albert survived an assassination attempt and as a sailor might have fallen victim to shipwreck, Arthur was close to death many times on military service, and Leopold died young of Haemophilia, and prior to the mid-20th century the average life expectancy for a sufferer was 11!

It is a stretch for all of them, but technically not impossible. Historically, the entire male issue of a Royal Line has died out before.
(Which frequently did lead to wars)

If they were desperate to avoid Wilhelm and wanted to eliminate any complications, especially personal unions and any other succession, there's always the Battenbergs. Princess Beatrice was married to the deceased by 1901 Prince Henry. And his parents marriage was considered morganatic, and hence not in the line for anything. Unfortunately, their eldest son, though conveniently born in England, is only 15
 
It would have made sense in the original timeline to stop the war in the first place, it was massively expensive and destructive. France lost 1/10th of it's adult male population, French society never recovered for over half a century. The problem was that the leaders and nationalists irredentist forces demanding the war continue. In this timeline France would have fought to the end.

But you didn't say "stop the war", as in Britain coming in with good faith and mediating a ceasefire on behalf of embattled France and Russia. You indicated British public opinion turns against France because the British prefer the French slaughtered in their millions along the common border just so that the sparsely populated Belgian Ardennes can remain quiet. Maybe the BEF goes to Germany to fight France, or maybe the French go into revolution as Paris falls in 1918. This is what you outlined. You're sure France and Russia are going to be all thankful about that? Because if they're not, what other game do they have but the Kaiser and his High Seas Fleet? And, on a related note, if the Russian and French fleet joined with the German fleet, could they blow the Grand Fleet out of the water? And if this came to pass, the British would get exactly what's coming to them, and would have no one to blame but themselves, correct?
 
The entire British Empire goes with it, including the United Kingdoms of England, Scotland,Wales and Ireland, the colonies Canada, Australia, etc.

I am sorry, I should of used the UK or British Empire. Please excuse an American for using the wrong term.

There was never a United Kingdoms of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland.

In 1284 the Statute of Rhuddlan annexed the Principality of Wales into the Kingdom of England.

In 1603 the Scottish King took over the Kingdom of England's throne and demanded to be referred to as the King of Great Britain.

In 1707 the Acts of Union joined the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland into the Kingdom of Great Britain.

In 1800 the Act of Union joined the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

In 1922 the Anglo-Irish Treaty resulted in the Republic of Ireland breaking off from the now named United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
 
But you didn't say "stop the war", as in Britain coming in with good faith and mediating a ceasefire on behalf of embattled France and Russia. You indicated British public opinion turns against France because the British prefer the French slaughtered in their millions along the common border just so that the sparsely populated Belgian Ardennes can remain quiet. Maybe the BEF goes to Germany to fight France, or maybe the French go into revolution as Paris falls in 1918. This is what you outlined. You're sure France and Russia are going to be all thankful about that? Because if they're not, what other game do they have but the Kaiser and his High Seas Fleet? And, on a related note, if the Russian and French fleet joined with the German fleet, could they blow the Grand Fleet out of the water? And if this came to pass, the British would get exactly what's coming to them, and would have no one to blame but themselves, correct?

It isn't that the British people can't excuse the French for attempting to pass through the Ardennes, it's that they'll have to occupy the entirety of Belgium to make the logistics of an invasion into Germany possible. Britain's treaty obligation and grand standing by newspapers will call for war against the French and it would be difficult for British leaders to justify the actions of the French and not greet them with outright hostility. Germany is going to desire a Brest Litovsk over Russia by any means, that was one of their motivation for getting involved in the war in the first place. They want to cast down Russia before they become too powerful. Theoretically they would be willing to come to an understanding with the French but how? The French people are going to be clamoring for war, the families of the hundreds of thousands of deceased will want vengeance. Kaiser Wilhelm preferred the English and there would be no reason for him to turn his back on their assistance especially when he would be slaughtering the Russians and easily achieving his war aims with them. Alsace Lorraine was too divisive.
 
It isn't that the British people can't excuse the French for attempting to pass through the Ardennes, it's that they'll have to occupy the entirety of Belgium to make the logistics of an invasion into Germany possible. Britain's treaty obligation and grand standing by newspapers will call for war against the French and it would be difficult for British leaders to justify the actions of the French and not greet them with outright hostility. Germany is going to desire a Brest Litovsk over Russia by any means, that was one of their motivation for getting involved in the war in the first place. They want to cast down Russia before they become too powerful. Theoretically they would be willing to come to an understanding with the French but how? The French people are going to be clamoring for war, the families of the hundreds of thousands of deceased will want vengeance. Kaiser Wilhelm preferred the English and there would be no reason for him to turn his back on their assistance especially when he would be slaughtering the Russians and easily achieving his war aims with them. Alsace Lorraine was too divisive.

You do recognise the potential for a total empire ending catastrophe for Britain in this course of action though, correct? You're saying the Germans won't do this and the French won't do that, but let's say they do? Can the Grand Fleet defeat the combined navies of the continental powers, yes or no?
 
What you need is a less successful Germany. You need a Germany that not only lost, but a France that took Belgium and threatened the Netherlands.

The British are always for the balance of Europe, they sided with the French, because Germany was the new strong power in Europe and their Navy program threatened the British. You need to keep France as the bigger and more threatening power. A France that took Belgium would almost certainly be on the British hit list.

In other words you need a PoD around 100 years before WW1 to really get this done.
 
There was never a United Kingdoms of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland.

In 1284 the Statute of Rhuddlan annexed the Principality of Wales into the Kingdom of England.

In 1603 the Scottish King took over the Kingdom of England's throne and demanded to be referred to as the King of Great Britain.

In 1707 the Acts of Union joined the Kingdom of England and the Kingdom of Scotland into the Kingdom of Great Britain.

In 1800 the Act of Union joined the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Kingdom of Ireland into the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

In 1922 the Anglo-Irish Treaty resulted in the Republic of Ireland breaking off from the now named United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

This might help
 
One my more fanciful rough sketches is having Theodore Roosevelt commit to two "elected" terms, thus no Taft in 1908 and probably a GOP President in 1912. Here I have TR get more involved in the Morocco crisis of 1911 and pursue his "League of Peace" and an naval arms treaty in earnest. This might see Germany forced to concede to a limit in its navy, even if not much then enough to take the wind out the RN fear mongering, Treasury would love to axe some ships here and although I doubt it would derail the Entente there might be just enough pressure taken off to put Germany and the UK on better ground come the July Crisis. Germany might have more respect for American power and France might find it has less clear support from the UK. Again I do not think this puts the British into the CP camp, but it is one of the later PODs I can conjure to tip England towards neutrality and that alone should up end much of the Great War as we know it.
 
You do recognise the potential for a total empire ending catastrophe for Britain in this course of action though, correct? You're saying the Germans won't do this and the French won't do that, but let's say they do? Can the Grand Fleet defeat the combined navies of the continental powers, yes or no?

I mean it's just the least likely scenario in that case, however I would have doubt that a combined French/German fleet could decisively beat the British. The French fleet wasn't particularly known for skill or quality and the Franco-German fleet would be roughly equal in numbers. However if the Austro-Hungarian fleet joined they could probably score a decisive victory.
 
Top