DBWI: Czechoslovakia not divided in 1945.

Tales Weaver

Tales Weaver

US Army marched into bohemia and moravia and soviets into slovakia at end of WW2. This caused capitalist "republic of Czechoslovakia" in the bohemia and moravia, and Communist "people's republic of Czechoslovakia" in slovakia.
And Both government claims to be legitimate government of all of Czechoslovakia.

If americans didn't march to Czechoslovakia, could Czechoslovakia be united, or divided anyways?
 

Thomas1195

Banned
bhlee0019 said:
US Army marched into bohemia and moravia and soviets into slovakia at end of WW2. This caused capitalist "republic of Czechoslovakia" in the bohemia and moravia, and Communist "people's republic of Czechoslovakia" in slovakia.
And Both government claims to be legitimate government of all of Czechoslovakia.

If americans didn't march to Czechoslovakia, could Czechoslovakia be united, or divided anyways?
Click to expand...
Yes, but under a Communist regime, both Czechs and Slovaks were quite friendly to Soviets even before the war. IOTL, the US was able to market itself as an alternate Western choice unrelated to Munich for the Czech
 

Thomas1195

Banned
bhlee0019 said:
Ooc: i was IC there, because i couldn't understand how the us convinced the czechs when they have strong feelings for what happened at munich in 1938.
Click to expand...
They stated that they had nothing to do with Munich, and that they genuinely wanted to liberate oppressed people in Europe.

Oh, they also gave massive funding to centre-right and especially centrist parties, such as Benes' party (by that time a social liberal party).
 

Galba Otho Vitelius

People put too much emphasis on where the armies wound up when Nazi Germany surrendered. The zones of influence had been hammered out beforehand.

For example, though Patton did get to Bohemia (though the Red Army may have stood aside and let him enter Prague), people forget that the British took both Hamburg and Lubeck at the last minute. Nevertheless, both those cities and the Kiel Canal wound up in the Soviet sphere. Churchill never liked the Soviets getting the Kiel Canal and would have happily traded territory in central Europe, but couldn't do much given how much his influence declined after the 1942 disasters.

"Czechoslovakia" was always an artificial construct, but then it was the successful of the Versailles created countries. In a World War 3 scenario, having Prague and Hamburg on opposite sides of the Iron Curtain may affect things, but I don't know how you get World War 3 to actually happen with this. Spy novels would be different. There may be some minor cultural effects with Bohemia on the other side of the Iron Curtain.
 

Thomas1195

Banned
Galba Otho Vitelius said:
For example, though Patton did get to Bohemia (though the Red Army may have stood aside and let him enter Prague), people forget that the British took both Hamburg and Lubeck at the last minute. Nevertheless, both those cities and the Kiel Canal wound up in the Soviet sphere. Churchill never liked the Soviets getting the Kiel Canal and would have happily traded territory in central Europe, but couldn't do much given how much his influence declined after the 1942 disasters.
Click to expand...
Poor Churchill (not so poor as the 1942 disasters occurred partly because of him). Fortunately, Nordic countries did not go Communist, although they were surrounded.
 
Clandango

Clandango

Thomas1195 said:
Poor Churchill (not so poor as the 1942 disasters occurred partly because of him). Fortunately, Nordic countries did not go Communist, although they were surrounded.
Click to expand...
Yes, people always have found the five Nordic Kingdoms having social democratic policies in place a bit confusing. Still, Switzeration was the price they paid to get Finnmark back. Though of course the Nordics being heavily armed on all borders... well, only two countries they had land borders with.

bhlee0019 said:
What happened in 1942?
Click to expand...
Turns out trying to defend the English Channel with fuel wastes a lot of fuel. And burns up fishing fleets. Who knew? He might be talking of the Napoleonic Wars 2.0. You know, how the British bombed the Danish fleet. Kinda a bad move, publicity wise.
 
Clandango

Clandango

bhlee0019 said:
And denmark retains these boarder with germany today, despite the fact that berlin wall fell and germany reunited under the west.
Click to expand...
The population there mostly calls themselves Danish or something of the sort anyways, so it is unlikely they want to go back to Germany. Though it does make me think. Would the Czechs move around their Germans or slaughter them if they stayed unified with the Slovako-Ruthenian portion of the country?
 
Tales Weaver

Tales Weaver

Clandango said:
Turns out trying to defend the English Channel with fuel wastes a lot of fuel. And burns up fishing fleets. Who knew? He might be talking of the Napoleonic Wars 2.0. You know, how the British bombed the Danish fleet. Kinda a bad move, publicity wise.
Click to expand...
That's why he was replaced by Attlee's labor party after ww2, despite winning..
 
Tales Weaver

Tales Weaver

Clandango said:
The population there mostly calls themselves Danish or something of the sort anyways, so it is unlikely they want to go back to Germany. Though it does make me think. Would the Czechs move around their Germans or slaughter them if they stayed unified with the Slovako-Ruthenian portion of the country?
Click to expand...
They will just move around their germans. They weren't genocidal like nazis.
 

ert44444

TBH it didn't matter that the Soviets managed to gain the Kiel Canal as the British took Heligoland back. Also would how would a united Czechoslovakia have developed post the fall of the Budapest Pact.
 
Clandango

Clandango

ert44444 said:
TBH it didn't matter that the Soviets managed to gain the Kiel Canal as the British took Heligoland back. Also would how would a united Czechoslovakia have developed post the fall of the Budapest Pact.
Click to expand...
The British got a rock. They seem more content with Frisia and Lubeck. For all the good it will go them. Pretty much a money sink. Back to the Slavs, though. Would this hypothetical union keep all of the Pre-WWII treaty rights it had to going along rivers that entered their country, as well as toll free access to ports at the mouths of the rivers?
 
Tales Weaver

Tales Weaver

Thomas1195 said:
They stated that they had nothing to do with Munich, and that they genuinely wanted to liberate oppressed people in Europe.

Oh, they also gave massive funding to centre-right and especially centrist parties, such as Benes' party (by that time a social liberal party).
Click to expand...
It would have been funnier if It was UK who marched into Prague, wouldn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top