Imperal Germany at the Washington Treaty

The British had in effect said pre-war they would build 5 BB's for every 3 capital ships the Germans did. A defacto 60% standard. So Japan's 3 rating would appear to be reasonable and a SPD government would go for it. Name your flavor of nationalist party goes nuts over anything less than equality. The German naval laws called for automatic replacement and they were going to start sticking the Germans with very large construction bill in 1920 on. With war costs, etc the Germans like everyone else will want a deal.

The Bayern 4, the two most advanced Mackensen's (Name ship and Graf Spee) are the core. Followed by Derfflinger, Hindenburg and whatever of the König 's it takes to get to 315K tons. The other Mackensen's are converted to carriers. Germans build a pair of 16" gun BB's in the early 1920's and delete König's.
 
French Mutuny Ends World War I

French Army Mutinies (1917)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Army_Mutinies_(1917)

The mutinies
The French troops at Chemin des Dames had suffered a steadily growing number of desertions since the end of April.[2] On 27 May, those desertions turned to mutiny. Up to 30,000 soldiers left the front line and reserve trenches and went to the rear.[2] Even in regiments where there was direct confrontation, such as the 74th Infantry Regiment, the men wished their officers no harm; they just refused to return to the trenches.[1] The mutinies were not a refusal of war, simply of a certain way of waging it.[3] The soldiers had come to believe that the attacks they were ordered to make were futile.
In the behind-the-lines towns of Soissons, Villers-Cotterêts, Fère-en-Tardenois and Cœuvres-et-Valsery, troops refused to obey their officers' orders or go to the front.[2] On 1 June, a French infantry regiment took over the town of Missy-aux-Bois.[2] According to historian Tony Ashworth, the mutinies were "widespread and persistent," and involved more than half the divisions in the French army.[3] On 7 June, General Pétain and British commander Sir Douglas Haig had a private talk: Pétain told Haig that two French divisions had refused to go and relieve two divisions in the front line.[4] Historian John Keegan estimates the true figure was over fifty divisions.[5]
Detailed research in 1983 by the late French military historian Guy Pedroncini, based on the French military archives, concludes that, altogether, 49 infantry divisions were destabilized and experienced repeated episodes of mutiny. This was calculated as: nine infantry divisions very gravely impacted by mutinous behavior; fifteen infantry divisions seriously affected; and twenty five infantry divisions affected by isolated but repeated instances of mutinous behavior. As the French Army comprised a total of 113 infantry divisions by the end of 1917,[6] this puts the proportion of destabilized French infantry divisions at 43%. Conversely, only 12 artillery regiments were affected by the crisis of indiscipline.[7]

Instead of the Mutiny ending, if the French are forced out of the War at this point UK and the Central Powers would be settle for an end of the War.

Germany would lose some colonies to Britain and gain other colonies from France and maybe Belgium.
 
Interesting conjecture here.

Some points the probably need to be taken as canon

For a peace of exhaustion the USA must remain out of the war.

In Germany the SDP is gaining strength and will most likely take power.

The KLM has effectively been discredited in it's current form.

The Heer would have won the war.

Remember national pride.

In a peace of exhaustion with no US entry Germany can hold on to territory captured as a bargaining chip for recognition of B/L treaty and return of some all colonies.

What happens to the OE.
Does it retain it's territory and there for quite a lot of the world's oil.
What about it's ships that GB essentially stole?
They had already been paid for and pride would demand that the Ottomans get them or better ships back.

As for Austro-Hungary I can't see it staying as as a single entity the fractures were already in place.

And what about Italy?
To the CP point of view they broke a treaty with them and can't be trusted.
And at this point of time didn't the CP hold Italian territory? Depending on the date of peace in 1917.

Very interesting what could happen here.
 
Ships

There's no "essentially" stole--they were stolen, pure and simple. They'd been paid for, and a crew was there for the ship that became Agincourt. That, however, is a relative detail that could be ironed out with cash, or two brand new ships, and some negotiation. Remember, though, at least one--perhaps two, but I don't recall--of the ships were paid for by popular subscription, not taxes, so it needs to be addressed.
 

Cook

Banned
France and Italy presumably still want parity with each other. Like in real life, neither is likely to be able to afford building up to their allowable tonnage.


France at the Washington Treaty argued strenuously for parity with the United States and Great Britain, citing its commitments to a global empire as necessitating such a fleet. That they did not receive parity caused a great deal of ill feelings in the French Fleet, something that hadn’t ended when World War Two broke out.
 
Top