alternatehistory.com

I'm sure there's a ton of thread of how Munich 1938 should have been handled, ranging from "it should have covered also the other plausible european flashpoints" to "it should not have been done at all".
However, I think that they all share the same original sin: they are based on what we know now, and not what they knew then.
Thus, I propose to re-do this from a different point view.
This is meant to be a collaborative effort regarding what could have been done in term of concessions (or non-concessions), guarantees, clauses, bilateral or multi-lateral agreement in order to build a more stable situation in early 1938.

Just follow 5 simple rules:

1) In order to express your point of view in a post, pick up one of the major characters of the time and try to put yourself in his shoes-then try to express what he would have declared.
Please try to be honest: choose the character nearer to your point of view to make your declaration, but do please not bend him to your ideas, if they do not coincide in all aspects.
2) choose the most suitable character to express your poit of view.
If you want to issue a diplomatic matter a Foreign Minister will do, while if you want to menace someone an head of state or a Chief of Army staff is to be preferred.
also, for example, if you disagree on someone's statements you could point out its (for example) military weak points by means of a Chief of Army staff or a Chief of intelligence.
3) The list of characters is reported in the 2nd post: they include the major European characters having a government post in 1938
I probably forget some and also probably made some errors: if you have other to propose, post about it; after a suitable number of posts I will modify the character list.
4) Both multilateral (e.g. Ribbentrop addressing the sudetenland issue) and bi-lateral (e.g. Benes asking a guarantee to UK) issues could be posted:
they should be answered by (one of) the appropriate character(s).
5) Again : Please try to be honest. Each character is representive of his own government's interests and his own government's interests do not (always) coincide with justice and ethics, even in democratic countries
Top