Well a lot of people agree with this, Churchill and Hitler included. The tricky part is that they would want to wait until June for the weather to clear. The CP didn't like Winter offensives after the 1914-1915 losses. Verdun allows the Germans the ability to do something right now.
Well a lot of people agree with this, Churchill and Hitler included. The tricky part is that they would want to wait until June for the weather to clear. The CP didn't like Winter offensives after the 1914-1915 losses. Verdun allows the Germans the ability to do something right now.
RightHoJeeves
Banned
True. Although ironically it was the winter weather in France that may have cost the Germans a quick victory at Verdun. Had the Germans not been forestalled by a 10 day blizzard and attacked on schedule they would have caught the French squarely off balance as they were in the middle of reorganizing their defenses in the formerly quiet sector. If they had the sheer shock could have rapidly collapsed all resistance on the right bank of the Meuse and the Germans take the heights on schedule to create their kill zone.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
(Paraphrased) Does his Majesty believe he can win the grand prize twice in the same lottery?
-von Moltke the Younger.
One shouldn't depend on one's opponent collapsing into civil war as part of their military strategy. Germany has to plan for the (also very likely) not-best-case scenarios that any civil unrest sputters out, gets surpressed long enough to achieve a solid military position, or ends up overwhelming German society before its Russian counterpart.
TheTuck
Banned
The goal wouldn't be full scale revolution, more so the fear of it to bring the Russians to terms in conjunction with the futility of Russian counter-offensives. Again with the example of the Russo-Japanese War, the revolution of 1905 wasn't a successful revolution that overthrew the Russian government, but it was enough to persuade the Russians to make peace, and it only took a year or so of Russian failure on the battlefield to bring it about. I'm not saying it's a perfect plan, but it's quite a reasonable one.
Óstöðvandi
Banned
In this era before Lelbenshau and the Großgermanisches Reich, what did Imperial Germany want? Was it a repeat of defeating France and Austria on the late 1800s?
To me, it makes far more sense for the Kaiser to meet with the Tsar, and together tell the Austen-Hungarians and Serbs to cool it. Germany should have focused on economic dominance, not fighting the world.
To me, it makes far more sense for the Kaiser to meet with the Tsar, and together tell the Austen-Hungarians and Serbs to cool it. Germany should have focused on economic dominance, not fighting the world.
Personally, the best they could do is not seek to take on both the Western Powers and Russia at the same time. A sane plan would have the plotters of Sarajevo declared criminals and try to seek a peaceful solution to WW1
BooNZ
Banned
A counter attack doctrine necessitates surrendering the initiative to ensure the decisive point of engagement is as close as practical to rail heads/ line of supply. This is essentially the opposite of Schlieffen plan, but more-or-less consistent with the OTL Battle of Tannenberg.
At the moment there are two concurrent threads on potential British belligerence. An earlier more detailed thread is dangerously close to a consensus among the contributors (aside from the occasional filibuster) that the British hawks probably need the Germans in Belgium to get Britain into the war. On a slightly later thread, a poll has populist support for Britain joining late.
In either case, if Belgium is neutral, what is Britain to do?
Joffre was rather open about breeching Belgium neutrality, but was precluded by the French politicians from making plans to do so. So any French plans are limited to whatever Joffre has ferreted away among his private papers. In my opinion, a recipe for disaster - of a French variety.
Safety
Generally Germany wanted to be save from the military threat of being attacked from both sides, east and west, Russia and France at the same time ... or being attacked militarily at all.
That would have given Germany also the saftey to exploit ist economical ... better-performing (compared to almost everybody else) to finally dominate global economy (it actually was not far from im 1914).
But ist main Opponent to this - Britain - had through its "Entente Cordial" with France the latter as well as Russia by ist alliance with France as ist ... continental Rapiers pointing at Germany (and in the german perception esp. France was more than ready to not only to point but strongly poke at/into Germany).
In essence : the german politicians as well as militaries in a strategical sense were heavily frightened.
The best thing Germany could have done is dont alienate Russia.
Than they should have provoked war with France in 1905. A much better situation for them. 1908 and the annexation crisis works as well.
They should have supported A-H during the Balkan wars instead of pursuing their own agenda. Likely a much better result than OTL.
They should have pressured A-H to get its shit together after seeing Russia start its military reform. The german military expert were aware of a lot of the most glaring issues of the A-H army. They should also have had a much larger german army if they could have gotten over their only noble officer ideas. It would be an interesting idea what the german could do with an extra german army in 1914.
They shouldnt have scrapped the eastern war plans after 1913 and gone with that in 1914. They should have accepted the fact that this will be a long war and not make a huge gamble with the Schlieffen plan. I think an east first strategy would have worked better.
I could continue the list but after Willy took over diplomatically germany went downhill at an increasing space and finally found itself isolated and encircled in 1914 with 3 of the greatest powers united against him. And despite all of this we can point on numerous occassions where the germans could have still won it against all odds. They were scary.
Than they should have provoked war with France in 1905. A much better situation for them. 1908 and the annexation crisis works as well.
They should have supported A-H during the Balkan wars instead of pursuing their own agenda. Likely a much better result than OTL.
They should have pressured A-H to get its shit together after seeing Russia start its military reform. The german military expert were aware of a lot of the most glaring issues of the A-H army. They should also have had a much larger german army if they could have gotten over their only noble officer ideas. It would be an interesting idea what the german could do with an extra german army in 1914.
They shouldnt have scrapped the eastern war plans after 1913 and gone with that in 1914. They should have accepted the fact that this will be a long war and not make a huge gamble with the Schlieffen plan. I think an east first strategy would have worked better.
I could continue the list but after Willy took over diplomatically germany went downhill at an increasing space and finally found itself isolated and encircled in 1914 with 3 of the greatest powers united against him. And despite all of this we can point on numerous occassions where the germans could have still won it against all odds. They were scary.
Óstöðvandi
Banned
But France wasn't going to be attacking Germany, and Russia was a mess after the 1905 disastrous war with Japan and its consequent revolution.
Safety is achieved through defense, strong deterrence and diplomacy. If I'm afraid of my neighbours I lock my doors and maybe buy a gun or two. I don't preemptively murder them in their beds.
longsword14
Banned
I would not consider the events of 1914 as 'preemptive'. Short of things rolling as they did, Berlin was not going to create a situation out of nowhere.
Too use your metaphore:
The problem is that you are aware that they too are buying guns. You are better armed now but they are waiting the arrival of their new arms tomorow and than you will be on their mercy. You also know that you have something that one of your neighbour really wants and has been saying so for many years. Do you risk to wait and see if their attack? Or attack while you have the advantage?
And about France not attacking Germany: I too dont think its likely. However they were never giving up on Alsace and were armed to a higher degree than germany and spent a lot of money on building up the russian Military which - the germans feared - is going to surpass them.
Max Sinister
Banned
The problem was, they had no clear plan everyone agreed on, but many interest groups (including important people) who had many ideas about expansion. And if you take all of those together, it must have seemed as if Germany wanted half of the world, if not more.
FillyofDelphi
Banned
Its reasonable to have a contingency set up to take advantage of domestic disturbances (both in military terms and pre-prepared terms for starting diplomatic talks and setting up an advantageous negotiated separate peace), but it would have to be an add-on/icing on the cake of the general pre-war plans, with the first expectation being that Russia will not accept a seperate peace that's acceptable to Germany unless forced into militarily untenable position and won't nessicerily be experiancing any unusual domestic situation. When one plans, they need to be prepared for the worst even if one hopes for the best; it was that issue that doomed Napoleon and Hitler, as both (despite their plans being tactically sound and successful) depended geopolitically on Russia being willing to surrender or collapse... and when she neglected to do so they found themselves overextended.
TheTuck
Banned
That's really the whole point of the strategy, to avoid getting sucked into the fast expanses of Russia and overextending and getting annihilated. So, what would your strategy be to win a two front war with France and Russia, without any use of hindsight and taking into consideration the fears of the German General Staff?
BooNZ
Banned
I doubt Wilhelm would have approved of any plan premised on the collapse of the Russian monarchy. The German military would have been reasonably confident of reaching Moscow or Petrograd before 1917, but less confident of the ability of German society to bear the strain of such an extended conflict.
BooNZ
Banned
Was Belgium the threat?
Can you name any important people in Germany with serious expansion plans before 1914? How many wars had Germany fought to expand its European interests since 1871?
From a review of the German Army's pre-war assessments of the Russian military, it is clear the German military did not fear the Russians. The OTL performance of the Russian military was more-or-less consistent with German expectations.
German advances into Imperial Russian are dependent on rail logistics with no opportunity to overextend. The mischief/fear in an eastern strategy is a slow advance (rate of rail capture/ conversion/ construction) over vast distances, thereby requiring German society to cope with an extended war.