Britain and France invades Germany in 1990 to stop German reunification

[Sarthak]

Veterans of what conflict? The Falkland's were hardly a major engagement; more like a minor skirmish against a demoralized and in many ways an inferior foe. The British Army only committed two brigades to the Falklands; they would need a whole lot more in this scenario.

a conflict at the ends of the earth, far from proper logistical support. Britain committed 2 Brigades, precisely because that was the maximum they could commit with their logistics being stretched 6700 kilometers.
Being outnumbered and outgunned in the air. Whatever the Army was on the ground the Argentine Airforce was anything but demoralized and inferior.
And the fact that British commanders became the only commanders in Western Europe to have actually fought a serious war, rather than the typical COIN operations that Britain and France undertook in Western Sahara, and Chad.
Also falklands veterans would actually dispute that the enemy was demoralized. @David Flin can take over on the Falklands issue. The Soviet Leadership (Quoting from The Invasion of Afghanistan and UK-Soviet Relations), believed the British wartime leadership to be the most well accustomed to actual modern war and as such most dangerous leadership during the warscare of 83 and 84.

 

[M79]

This might be feasible if the Adenauer proposal from 1962 somehow came to pass - West Berlin is swapped for the German territories taken by the Allies before World War II ended; i.e. Thuringen, the western half of Magdeberg, and the western quarter or so of Mecklenberg

Map: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/All...File:Germany_occupation_zones_with_border.jpg

Eastern Germany now has a smaller area and is basically Prussia reborn, the rest of Gross-West-Germany might decide the Prussians alone are too much trouble and maybe federate or collaborate instead if integrate...

 

[Roland Traveler]

Yes and no. 🧐
I was rather responding to those who imagined Germany destroying the French and British troops before crossing the Rhine to obtain Alsace Lorraine.
Edit: And there might be some demotivated people on the German side too. 🤪
A bit like the defeatists in France in 1940 (all proportion kept).

I haven’t seen anything like that. What I have seen is people saying an army defending its home turf in a type of warfare it’s specifically trained for fighting against people who will either be giving them glaring red flares about their intentions (moving troops out of Germany, but still leaving them on the border) or will have significant numbers trapped behind enemy lines will be able to decisively defeat said enemy. Nobody brought up counterattacking into France, let alone trying to reannex Alsace-Lorraine.

 

[Comte de Dordogne]

I haven’t seen anything like that. What I have seen is people saying an army defending its home turf in a type of warfare it’s specifically trained for fighting against people who will either be giving them glaring red flares about their intentions (moving troops out of Germany, but still leaving them on the border) or will have significant numbers trapped behind enemy lines will be able to decisively defeat said enemy. Nobody brought up counterattacking into France, let alone trying to reannex Alsace-Lorraine.

If on the front page, someone mentioned reclaiming Alsace Lorraine for Germany (probably with a pinch of irony) and many seem to overestimate the German army and decry that of France and Great Britain.
Finally I don't see how you deconstructed my arguments.
Anyway, why look for coherence when you are in ASB?

 

[David T]

This might be feasible if the Adenauer proposal from 1962 somehow came to pass - West Berlin is swapped for the German territories taken by the Allies before World War II ended; i.e. Thuringen, the western half of Magdeberg, and the western quarter or so of Mecklenberg

Map: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied-occupied_Germany#/media/File:Germany_occupation_zones_with_border.jpg

Eastern Germany now has a smaller area and is basically Prussia reborn, the rest of Gross-West-Germany might decide the Prussians alone are too much trouble and maybe federate or collaborate instead if integrate...

It's just barely possible that the US would accept such a plan, though JFK would have to brave GOP charges that having sold out the Cubans at the Bay of Pigs he was now selling out the people of West Berlin. But I cannot see any Soviet leader accepting the idea: "Let's give up important industrial areas of the GDR--and ease the threat on the Fulda Gap--for a West Berlin that will probably be largely depopulated as its residents flee to the Federal Republic." Moreover, the very fact that the West was making such an offer would be seen as a sign it recognized West Berlin was indefensible--so the Soviets would feel they would eventually get it anyway.

 

[Alanith]

a conflict at the ends of the earth, far from proper logistical support. Britain committed 2 Brigades, precisely because that was the maximum they could commit with their logistics being stretched 6700 kilometers.
Being outnumbered and outgunned in the air. Whatever the Army was on the ground the Argentine Airforce was anything but demoralized and inferior.
And the fact that British commanders became the only commanders in Western Europe to have actually fought a serious war, rather than the typical COIN operations that Britain and France undertook in Western Sahara, and Chad.
Also falklands veterans would actually dispute that the enemy was demoralized. @David Flin can take over on the Falklands issue. The Soviet Leadership (Quoting from The Invasion of Afghanistan and UK-Soviet Relations), believed the British wartime leadership to be the most well accustomed to actual modern war and as such most dangerous leadership during the warscare of 83 and 84.

It's still, no matter how you try to arrange the facts, not remotely comparable a conflict to high speed, high intensity combined arms warfare in the German Plains. You know, the War the WG and EG had trained for for 45 years, and were basically until the last five or ten years the undisputed champions of. The war which they also outnumber the immediately available forces able to face them by 2 to 1, and half of those forces are DEEP behind newly established enemy lines and easily surrounded and defeated in detail. How wild will Thatcher be to continue the war or escalate to nuclear use on the battlefield when the entire BAOR is being shown on live BBC and CNN a week into the conflict, stacking arms and entering the buses that will take them to the prisoner of war camps? And they *are not* going to be fighting to the death in any glorious last stands, because their terms of surrender are probably going to be something like "As long as you or any of the men under your command have committed no war crimes against German troops or civilians, you will be repatriated as soon as a final peace settlement is reached, and treated well until that point." not "We're going to stuff you in a concentration camp and starve you to death making V2 parts."

 

[Eivind]

Can Soviet forces repel that invasion and redeem in their image in eyes of the GermanS ?

Why would Russia have any interest in doing so? Russia had no interest in a united Germany?

 

[AHFan]

My personal opinion is that we repeat the Suez Canal fiasco of the 50s.

The US demands a hard stop to the operation and the US may receive political support from Russia / USSR.

 

[Roland Traveler]

If on the front page, someone mentioned reclaiming Alsace Lorraine for Germany (probably with a pinch of irony) and many seem to overestimate the German army and decry that of France and Great Britain.
Finally I don't see how you deconstructed my arguments.
Anyway, why look for coherence when you are in ASB?

You’re right, one person mentioned Alsace Lorraine in jest, but the rest of this is just gibberish. What arguments have you made that weren’t wild strawmanning and clown faces? What do you mean, “why look for coherence when you are in ASB”? This isn’t ASB, and ASB doesn’t mean nonsensical. It’s perfectly possible to have an ASB story that is internally coherent even if the premise is absurd.

 

[CalBear]

Pretty much is ASB. There is no way this happens . Generally democracies do' not declare war on other democracies If you dont count the CSA as a democracy the only eg is Finland V Britain in the continuation war. No shots were exchanged. Even if the 2 leaders were that insane without US and German support just how does one stop the Russian countermove. How do you govern an occupied democracy whose right to self determination you just destroyed. What do you say to Argentina when they once again demand the Malvinas or to the US when it demands Ulster be given to Ireland. You cant start spouting off about the right of people to govern themselves then, you have made it clear only the gun matters, and sadly Britain and France although still powerful can not rule the world by force. There are bigger players .

May as well use this post to serve as place for a reminder to all -

Just because a scenario or WI makes no sense or is unlikely to the point of near impossible, does not make it ASB. Frequently they are just poorly thought out or not properly supported.

 

[Comte de Dordogne]

You’re right, one person mentioned Alsace Lorraine in jest, but the rest of this is just gibberish. What arguments have you made that weren’t wild strawmanning and clown faces?

Arguments about what exactly?
I have developed many arguments since the beginning of this thread on multiple issues, if you don't want to find them I can understand that but don't make me look like a clown.

What do you mean, “why look for coherence when you are in ASB”? This isn’t ASB, and ASB doesn’t mean nonsensical. It’s perfectly possible to have an ASB story that is internally coherent even if the premise is absurd.

I have already explained a few pages ago why (personally) I considered that we were in ASB. And my definition doesn't seem to be delusional since many others here consider it ASB.
And where I find some absurdity is to dismiss some remarks as impossible when the starting premise is already improbable in itself.
But it's easy to blame me for this when you haven't read my previous posts where I clearly explain my thinking.

 

[Sarthak]

It's still, no matter how you try to arrange the facts, not remotely comparable a conflict to high speed, high intensity combined arms warfare in the German Plains.

The conflict is not, however the Soviets were more interested in war tested leadership, which no country other than UK or Argentina could boast in the Western Hemisphere.
Also, i would rather need proof or sources to counter-point the source i gave instead of petty accusations like 'trying to arrange the facts' thank you very much

You know, the War the WG and EG had trained for for 45 years, and were basically until the last five or ten years the undisputed champions of.

I am unsure what you hope to mean by this? Every country in Europe had trained for the last 45 years for war. Anyways, i cannot speak for France, however British Basic training was ~20 weeks during the cold war, and the West German one, which was far better than the East German one had ~14 weeks of basic training. They were undisputed champions at all, the British basic training was at least ~6 weeks higher than the average Bundeswehr training as well.

he war which they also outnumber the immediately available forces able to face them by 2 to 1, and half of those forces are DEEP behind newly established enemy lines and easily surrounded and defeated in detail.

That is true enough, and I don't think anyone has denied that. But if we are really going to decide wars on numbers and PoWs alone then I have got aroud 600 wars to list that can prove that fact wrong.

How wild will Thatcher be to continue the war or escalate to nuclear use on the battlefield when the entire BAOR is being shown on live BBC and CNN a week into the conflict, stacking arms and entering the buses that will take them to the prisoner of war camps?

Like.......every country out there? America had its military failures in Iraq and Afghanistan displayed on full TV for a decade before they started to trickle soldiers out. Britain too had its military failures in Iraq and Afghanistan shown for 3 years straight before they pulled out. France stayed in the Algerian War of Independence for half a decade even though all the gritty details were being broadcasted home in full color tv. The same is the case for the Vietnam War. Your point doesn't make sense in light of recent modern conflicts in which the powers of America, Britain and France has taken part in.

And they *are not* going to be fighting to the death in any glorious last stands, because their terms of surrender are probably going to be something like "As long as you or any of the men under your command have committed no war crimes against German troops or civilians, you will be repatriated as soon as a final peace settlement is reached, and treated well until that point." not "We're going to stuff you in a concentration camp and starve you to death making V2 parts."

I don't think anyone expects the second to happen. So why are you trying to tell me that I do?

 

[MrHaakwood]

Yeah, thinking that the Bundeswehr could win is a really big stretch. They spent most of their time being drunk and doing marches, they really were no special force. The NVA was better trained.

Everything in this sentence is complete & utter bullshit! One army had their recruits deserting to the other side, the other one was making Europes capitals nervous. And it wasnt the NVA! The only thing they made nervous where the Soviet HQ & not because they feard some EKs.

 

[HelloThere]

Everything in this sentence is complete & utter bullshit! One army had their recruits deserting to the other side, the other one was making Europes capitals nervous. And it wasnt the NVA! The only thing they made nervous where the Soviet HQ & not because they feard some EKs.

I guess you too have relatives from the GDR and don't want to lecture me just based on reading a Wikipedia article? And when did the Bundeswehr make anyone "nervous"? That's laughable.

 

[MrHaakwood]

I guess you too have relatives from the GDR and don't want to lecture me just based on reading a Wikipedia article? And when did the Bundeswehr make anyone "nervous"? That's laughable.

No, I dont have relatives in East Germany, but I have read enough books about the European unification process to know what I am talking about. The Bundeswehr made people nervous from the begining. Specialy in the 60ies and 80ies, because these where times of expansion and upgrades. Dont believe me? Part of reunification was a massive downgrade of the size Oh, and I live here, served in the Bundeswehr and talked with enough former NVA and STASI people to know what miserable piece of shit the NVA was. The idea that the Bundeswehr consisted of drunken youth is complete rubish, but a common myth. The typical "Bundi" was sadly the most widespread meeting point for the West German population. Thats why this myth perputaed so long. Its the only thing they knew. They didnt see the 5000panzers or the massive Luftwaffe, or as John Lewis Gaddis put it: as "perhaps world's best army". Speaking Cold War here. The idea that the NVA was on the same level is outlandish bullshit. The NVA and the Soviet HQ didnt trust their own army, because the moral was so low. Its absurd to assume the NVA can messure up to the Bundeswehr.
Funny enough: There are two kind of people who believe this myth. The one who doesnt know it any better. And the one who believe the Cold War Bundeswehr didnt have enough Wehrmacht in it, compared to the NVA so it must have been a shitty army. So, which one are you?

​

 

[M79]

Never. Underestimate. Anyone.

An army built in peacetime on the bedrock of a defeated empire should still be taken seriously. So should an army unfairly besmirched when its leadership earlier in that same war essentially surrendered once its vaunted defensive line broke.

 

[HelloThere]

No, I dont have relatives in East Germany, but I have read enough books about the European unification process to know what I am talking about. The Bundeswehr made people nervous from the begining. Specialy in the 60ies and 80ies, because these where times of expansion and upgrades. Dont believe me? Part of reunification was a massive downgrade of the size Oh, and I live here, served in the Bundeswehr and talked with enough former NVA and STASI people to know what miserable piece of shit the NVA was. The idea that the Bundeswehr consisted of drunken youth is complete rubish, but a common myth. The typical "Bundi" was sadly the most widespread meeting point for the West German population. Thats why this myth perputaed so long. Its the only thing they knew. They didnt see the 5000panzers or the massive Luftwaffe, or as John Lewis Gaddis put it: as "perhaps world's best army". Speaking Cold War here. The idea that the NVA was on the same level is outlandish bullshit. The NVA and the Soviet HQ didnt trust their own army, because the moral was so low. Its absurd to assume the NVA can messure up to the Bundeswehr.
Funny enough: There are two kind of people who believe this myth. The one who doesnt know it any better. And the one who believe the Cold War Bundeswehr didnt have enough Wehrmacht in it, compared to the NVA so it must have been a shitty army. So, which one are you?

​

So first of all, I already said that I exaggerrated. Of course the Bundeswehr wasn't just a bunch of drunk idiots. And I didn't say that the NVA had good morale, just that it was better trained. The commanders in the NVA took the threat of a Western Invasion much more serious than the Bundeswehr did with the threat of a Warsaw Pact-invasion. The Bundeswehr was a pretty ok NATO-military, but certainly far away from the "world's best army". The Bundeswehr would've never stood a chance against the US Army or the IDF, which are really good armies. I can't blame the Bundeswehr during the Cold War, to be fair: They didn't do any foreign missions and in a case of WW3 both NVA & Bundeswehr would just get nuked into oblivion.

I don't know why you have to resort to personal attacks. I will just talk about the topic. If you want to ask me personal questions, PM me.