CaliGuy
Banned
Yeah--plus, I can't imagine the German people simply being willing to passively acquiesce in the Holocaust; sure, many of them might have been anti-Semites, but killing people would be way over the top even for them!
DBWI: Have Germany lose the Great War
- Thread starter Whiteshore
- Start date
-
- Tags
- dbwi german empire kaiserreich ww1
Well that kind of fits the Democratic Republic of Brazil. But yeah, in general, it seems like communism is more effective in urbanized industrial countries like France and Japan.
Well, Germany was allegedly going to be split up into several smaller nations if it was to lose the Great War, so I see Germanic culture losing worldwide prominence. As for the idea of Adolf Hitler becoming a rabid National Socialist or whatever that crazy party was called, it sounds extremely implausible to me.
Yep, even Boris Savinkov's Russia focused on forced Russification and relocating "disloyal peoples" as opposed to genocide.Yeah--plus, I can't imagine the German people simply being willing to passively acquiesce in the Holocaust; sure, many of them might have been anti-Semites, but killing people would be way over the top even for them!
OOC: If you're wondering about why I had Savinkov leads a *Fascist Russia, it's meant to be a Kaiserreich reference.
Well, they turned a blind eye to Mittelafrika...Yeah--plus, I can't imagine the German people simply being willing to passively acquiesce in the Holocaust; sure, many of them might have been anti-Semites, but killing people would be way over the top even for them!
CaliGuy
Banned
Those were Black people, though; in contrast, the Holocaust mostly involved Europeans/White people.
Or Benito Mussolini switching from a Socialist to a National Populist, for that matter.
FBKampfer
Banned
Yeah, have France not fuck up as badly. Like, almost literally any moderate POD works. You butterfly away one major battle, and you're fine.
But the 300,000 pow's at Chaumon, the Besoncon falling literally the next day, I think 2.2 million casualties at Troyes, and over 900,000 killed outright at Orleans. And then you start using Roman decimation on units that refuse to take the field. In the space of three months? Fuck, any army would mutinee after that.
But yeah, just keep the "major debacle" list under six and the Third Republic is still sitting pretty. Well, sorta.
But the 300,000 pow's at Chaumon, the Besoncon falling literally the next day, I think 2.2 million casualties at Troyes, and over 900,000 killed outright at Orleans. And then you start using Roman decimation on units that refuse to take the field. In the space of three months? Fuck, any army would mutinee after that.
But yeah, just keep the "major debacle" list under six and the Third Republic is still sitting pretty. Well, sorta.
Or have the government react to the catastrophes via asking for peace terms as opposed to suicidal offensives and draconian measures to get troops to fight.
So, @bhlee0019, what do you think was the main cause of the Eurasian War and was it inevitable after Germany won the Great War?
The cause of War was that England, France, and Russia tried to take revenge for the Great war. Also, they tried to regain Alsace Lorraine region, one of the most industrial region. Also, for England, tried to regain colonial empre back. Russia.. they tried to regain lost territories. I think it was inevitable after germany won that war.
Sidenote and not bashing you here, but "Second French Revolution" is such a pop-history misnomer. Like all the other French Revolutions didn't happen. Now if I was a Marxist I'd say that those weren't Revolutions, they were Capitalist vs Capitalist, but, well, I'm not. Vive la Roi! I seriously hope that 1917 was France's last Revolution; the House of Orleans has been fairly secure since the Eurasian War but hey, you never know.
This is getting ridiculous. Is there anything constructive here? Or are we all just trying to ignore how the Germans would been torn apart even worse that some of the war's losers had been? At the very least Germany would have been broken up into the German Confederation of long ago, though with a couple changes. Besides Hanover and the other anti-Prussian states getting independence, Prussian Saxony goes back to Saxony (or to a cadet branch), Prussian Silesia goes to The Crownlands of Bohemia or to Austria (I think the best chance for the Germans to loss the war is if the Austrians turn on them), and the Prussian Rhineland gets split up a couple of wars. The southern portion between the Mosel and Rhine goes with Alsace-Lorraine, Luxembourg regains the areas they lost to Prussia in the past (maybe also getting Belgian Luxembourg to shore up the French speaking population further, while Belgian goes sharp easr, with some areas between them, the French, and Luxembourg to be decided upon later, maybe with colonial border changes. This is assuming the French don't just annex Lumbourg and Belgium for themselves. Perhaps not, as then they might have to share a bit of if with the English or Hollanders. Speaking of the Dutch, they would give up Limburg (the Germans occupied it anyways, so why not?) to Belgium, maybe also Dutch Zeeland, and in echo get hey get the lower Rhine to around Düsseldorf. The English would have to be placated with more than just colonies though, so they probably end up with Essen. May also see the Danes and Swedes taking the lands they once held in Pomerania, Bremen, Holstein, etc. hypothetically (veeeery hypothetically) if the Entente did not do this, which colony do you think they would let the Germans keep? Has to be big enough to focus their energy on.