In a late CP victory scenario, what is the international reputation/status of France by the 90s?

So the Brirish are somehow maintaining the blockade after the war is finished? Why?

Negotiation tattic? The war will be technically finished but the negotiation will last a lot, so keeping the blockade it's a move to make Berlin see London necessity.

Certainly not with that attitude. You have to beat it, occupy it for a long time, limit military industry and limit development through outright bans, form the political system according to your vision and there you go.

Even if Germany gives up its occupation because somehow there's a partisan war which manages to actually do someting unlike anywhere else France would still be permanently crippled because of how fast technology is advancing nowadays. The power difference becomes only larger.

And what attitude do you expet from the Germans? The war will be technically finished but they are tired, hungry and very war weary, their allies are falling apart and need support, the political internal front is ready to a very frank and violent debate over the future of the nation and the puppet in the east are restless...not counting the communist making propaganda and the civil war in Russia expand in the new territory, plus there is the influenza.
On top of that, you expect that they occupy France in that manner...the soldiers will want to go back home, they have already give enough.
 
As was most of Europe. Germany still never reached the low point of the Turnip Winter post-war. A bit hard to reconcile that with your (and lukedalton`s) pet scenario of a massive socialist uprising that brings down the German Empire after a victory in WWI. Either way, didn`t you up until recently claim that Germany would follow the exact path of Imperial Japan after a CP victory? What happened to change your mind?

Both are possible. My assumption is the guys who couldn't win the war OTL can't win the peace ATL.
 
France will be a super power. Germany will bankrupt itself trying to hold down Russia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East. This leads to a revolution in Germany, and then France can shake off occupation and then invade a chaotic civil war wracked Germany, securing dominance over Europe.

Or they'll attempt to rebel against a powerful Germany and be carved into a dozen pieces.

Or they'll end up joining Germany and other nations in a European Federation.

Or be a nuclear wasteland after a US-German nuclear war.

Or....
 
Negotiation tattic? The war will be technically finished but the negotiation will last a lot, so keeping the blockade it's a move to make Berlin see London necessity.

A blockade is an act of war. If the British are blockading the Continent, then the war is still not over.

Both are possible. My assumption is the guys who couldn't win the war OTL can't win the peace ATL.

That logic isn`t really air-tight, you know. Or particularly sound.
 
As was most of Europe. Germany still never reached the low point of the Turnip Winter post-war. A bit hard to reconcile that with your (and lukedalton`s) pet scenario of a massive socialist uprising that brings down the German Empire after a victory in WWI. Either way, didn`t you up until recently claim that Germany would follow the exact path of Imperial Japan after a CP victory? What happened to change your mind?

Personally i see a massive socialist or fascist uprising (can be both way) because...sure she had won (the most costly and brutal conflict know to man till that moment, better not forget this...we are talking about the Great War not some minor border skirmish) but she had also:

1) overextended herselfs
2) it will be a 'mutilated victory' as at this stage getting everything she want it's not possible...and frankly it will be not enough even in case of total victory, it can't be enough, not after that bloodshed and ITTL Hindenburg will not have anyone to blame for this.

Germany will fall to revolution? Maybe, maybe not difficult to decide without a clear timeline...what i say it's that she can't hope to go for total continental domination, the entente had to retreat from many place (Albania, Russia intervention, Turkey) and even Germany will be forced to scale down any of her project.
 
[QUOTE="machine3589, post: 13051552, member: 10738

That logic isn`t really air-tight, you know. Or particularly sound.[/QUOTE]
You're right, it's possible the guys who supported fascism and the far right will voluntarily step down in 1919 with no violence.
 
A blockade is an act of war. If the British are blockading the Continent, then the war is still not over.

The British rule the wawe, they can do basically what they want and call it as they please...even OTL they continued the blockade during the armistice.
 
Personally i see a massive socialist or fascist uprising (can be both way) because...sure she had won (the most costly and brutal conflict know to man till that moment, better not forget this...we are talking about the Great War not some minor border skirmish) but she had also:

And I suppose all the victors of WWI went through massive socialist and fascist uprisings, right? Just because it happened in your country does not make it a universal outcome.

Germany will fall to revolution? Maybe, maybe not difficult to decide without a clear timeline...what i say it's that she can't hope to go for total continental domination, the entente had to retreat from many place (Albania, Russia intervention, Turkey) and even Germany will be forced to scale down any of her project.

Except this is not what you regularly claim; you claim that Germany will fall apart at the drop of a hat because everyone will suddenly start massive uprisings against German rule everywhere. For some reason.

The bolded part I can actually agree with; even with a secured sphere of influence in the Balctics, eastern Europe and the Balkans, Germany still won`t have the capabilities of total continental domination.

You're right, it's possible the guys who supported fascism and the far right will voluntarily step down in 1919 with no violence.

It is, because this is Alternate History, where things can happen differently from OTL.

The British rule the wawe, they can do basically what they want and call it as they please...

Except they can`t do whatever they please, otherwise there would be no negotiations and the British would fight on the war until it was won... even if it lasted until 1956.

even OTL they continued the blockade during the armistice.

Yes, when Germany was defeated and Entente armies stood victorious in Western Europe. ITTL, with all of its continental allies defeated, the British would have to blockade the entire continent for the blockade to have an effect. Is it really that hard to see that things would be different if Germany wins the war?
 
Last edited:
So, where I struggle is to find a single point in 1914 to 1918 where Germany didn't choose the worst possible choice. With that as the baseline...
 
A victorious Germany keeps the Brest-Litovsk Treaty and keeps CP plans for the rest of E Europe post-war (Germanic kings of Poland, Lithuania, Finland etc). This won't be a stable promised land, but it will be a damn sight less than war, will require far less troops (see how Germany was able during the war to transfer troops from East to West) and will probably result in somewhat friendly regimes in Moscow and Kiev, not to mention the Caucasus and the survival of the Ottoman and Habsburg empires.

That's relevant because the end of war also relieves ALL food problems for Germany as not only has it continued access to Eastern supplies which are coming online, but it has renewed international credit (nobody is going to deny a victorious German Empire credit) and can import huge amounts using its hithertofore interned or laid-up merchant marine.
 
Germany ruled Ukraine and Poland in 197 OTL. They couldn't get the grain out because they had nothing to give the peasants, no way to ship it, and rebellions.

This won't get solved overnight.
 
Germany ruled Ukraine and Poland in 1917 OTL. They couldn't get the grain out because they had nothing to give the peasants, no way to ship it, and rebellions.

This won't get solved overnight.

Exactly, but it will be solved. See my point on international credit. Germany is going to be able to import as much food as it needs in the immediate period because nobody is going to risk screwing over their future normal terms trading relationship with the victorious German Empire. There are hundreds of merchant ships in German ports doing nothing, who can get crews from demobilised forces, and there are interned ships that would be returned, and can be crewed by their interned crews (for a start - also anyone they can take on short term).
 
So, where I struggle is to find a single point in 1914 to 1918 where Germany didn't choose the worst possible choice. With that as the baseline...

Since they managed to stay in the war from 1914. to 1918., they obviously didn`t choose the worst possible choice at all times, which frankly would have seen them defeated in 1914. If this sweeping opinion of yours is what you hold up as fact, then I guess there is nothing that can really change your mind.
 
Except they can`t do whatever they please, otherwise there would be no negotiations and the British would fight on the war until it was won... even if it lasted until 1956.

And Germany what can do to counteract the British move? Decide to not negotiate? And Negotiating mean that she will be forced to give up something or to come to a compromise over some point...the problem is that in this situation, everything will be blow out of proportion by some faction or another creating more instability, you say why this will happen? Because if you win after almost 3.000.000 deaths politically you can't give up anything unless you have an incredible desire to be crucified by the pubblic opinion (maybe even litteraly)

And I suppose all the victors of WWI went through massive socialist and fascist uprisings, right? Just because it happened in your country does not make it a universal outcome.

Well, France has not be really stable in the entire interwar period and had come close in 1934, let's see...Russia has fallen to revolution and in general all the new nation in the east has fallen to fascist/authoritarian goverment and in some case after being subjected to communist revolution (see Hungary); the United Kingdom was the more stable (as it was the most modern and stable nation even before the war and with the better democratic enstablishment) but had seen the start of the unraveling of his empire and had been forced to let Ireland go away...and more importantly both Paris and London (and even Rome to be honest, Benny rethoric notwhistanding) had lost any reall taste for costly military adventure/engagement.
Netherlands, even if neutral, had some big communist revolt but later resolved...so no, nobody had an happy ride after the war and Germany will not be different, just because she had won all her problem had not magically vanished and many will want to resolve them...violently.

Except this is not what you regularly claim; you claim that Germany will fall apart at the drop of a hat because everyone will suddenly start massive uprisings against German rule everywhere. For some reason.

No, i just regularly claim that unlike someone else that think that Germany in a late war victory can succesfully at the same time do everything, i think that if she tried this she will fail because it's not omnipotent and not composed by superhuman...and the reason because there will be uprising it's the fact that Berlin want to economically and politically totally dominate her new neighbourgh (and in case of lack of food in the fatherland...take it from them) and the local population maybe had some different idea, shocking isn't?
 
And Germany what can do to counteract the British move? Decide to not negotiate?

Yes. If the British insist on keeping the war going, then why not simply keep the war going? But then again Britain can`t keep the war going on forever. Wars are expensive.

Well, France has not be really stable in the entire interwar period and had come close in 1934, let's see...

So, no complete disintegration because of a fascist or socialist uprising?

Russia has fallen to revolution

That happened during the war.

and in general all the new nation in the east has fallen to fascist/authoritarian goverment and in some case after being subjected to communist revolution (see Hungary);

Yes, after they were more-or-less created from scratch from the corpses of former multinational Empires.

the United Kingdom was the more stable (as it was the most modern and stable nation even before the war and with the better democratic enstablishment) but had seen the start of the unraveling of his empire and had been forced to let Ireland go away...and more importantly both Paris and London (and even Rome to be honest, Benny rethoric notwhistanding) had lost any reall taste for costly military adventure/engagement.

So, no collapse to communist and fascist uprisings.

...so no, nobody had an happy ride after the war and Germany will not be different, just because she had won all her problem had not magically vanished and many will want to resolve them...violently.

Except nobody claimed that Germany would come out of the war smelling of roses, however you have claimed - repeatedly - that Germany would collapse under its own weight almost immediately after the war. So all I can assume is that you are trying to refute an argument that hasn`t been made by anyone.

No, i just regularly claim that unlike someone else that think that Germany in a late war victory can succesfully at the same time do everything,

The last person that claimed something even remotely to that was Beer, and he has been banned for some time. So again, you are arguing against a position that nobody has made.

and the reason because there will be uprising it's the fact that Berlin want to economically and politically totally dominate her new neighbourgh (and in case of lack of food in the fatherland...take it from them) and the local population maybe had some different idea, shocking isn't?

So how the hell did the Russian Empire ever last more than three years after ruling such an area of restless peoples after 1815.? How did Austria-Hungary survive among such uprisings? What? They didn`t happen as often as you think? Hell, Imperial Germany won`t even exert the level of total control over the new countries that these empires did, and you continually claim that they`ll face a concerted uprising effort which, going by your discriptions, even the Nazis didn`t have to contend with? Seriously?

Eastern Europeans are not a hive mind. Some will benefit from Mitteleuropa, and maintaining that rule will be in their interests. Hell, even if we assume that Germany`s system will face as much opposition that the Warsaw Pact system did, Soviet rule lasted for 46 years. And will you seriously claim that Germany after winning WWI will be in as bad of a situation as Russia was after WWII?

 
So, no complete disintegration because of a fascist or socialist uprising?

But they were not trying to keep down an entire continent, they had even be forced to retreat from Turkey and Russia and were basically paralizated and shocked for 20 years after the end of the war, always on the brink.

That happened during the war.

That happend at cause of the war

Yes, after they were more-or-less created from scratch from the corpses of former multinational Empires.

Like the new nation out of B-L? Or whatever will become of the A-H empire?

So, no collapse to communist and fascist uprisings.

No just decline, paralysis, some piece getting out, loss of credibility of the current system that allowed idea like fascist and communism to be seen as viable...and this in the most modern, stable and democratic nation of the planet...much much less touched by the war than Germany


Yes. If the British insist on keeping the war going, then why not simply keep the war going? But then again Britain can`t keep the war going on forever. Wars are expensive.



Blockade are much much more cheaper

Except nobody claimed that Germany would come out of the war smelling of roses, however you have claimed - repeatedly - that Germany would collapse under its own weight almost immediately after the war. So all I can assume is that you are trying to refute an argument that hasn`t been made by anyone.



The last person that claimed something even remotely to that was Beer, and he has been banned for some time. So again, you are arguing against a position that nobody has made.

I say that Germany late war victory mean overextending herself and yes, this mean collapse under it's own weight...and regarding people not claiming that, please reread the various post. Strip east europe of iron, coal and industry? Force harsh term on France through occupation and forced change of a political system that German like? That's are not simple, quick or cheap things to do.

Eastern Europeans are not a hive mind. Some will benefit from Mitteleuropa, and maintaining that rule will be in their interests. Hell, even if we assume that Germany`s system will face as much opposition that the Warsaw Pact system did, Soviet rule lasted for 46 years. And will you seriously claim that Germany after winning WWI will be in as bad of a situation as Russia was after WWII?

Sure, Germany was on a worse situation than Russia, because for all her destruction the URSS was united politically and totally behind...or better under one leader, hell the Great Patriottic War was an enourmous nation building effort. Here? Germany had serious internal political problem, the current political system had lost a lot of credibility and people smell weakness and it's better remember that the URSS faced revolt and guerrilla warfare for a decade after the war in the entire east europe. Sure they have failed, but at least the various communist nation had an ideological feag leaf to justify themselfs, much of the post B-L leaderships not.
Regarding east europeans not being an hive mind, you are right...but when you take the food from one place (Poland and Ukraine) to feed your own people...the former owner of the food start to rebels due to strange desire to not want die to famine; the following economic exploatation will surely not make any friend there, except the german appointed leaderships.
Finally soviet rule lasted even because they had the capacity to annihilate all life on this mudball...so the rest of the world really don't messed to much in their backyard
 
We say that some will benefit from Mitteleuropa, but other than the baron elite of the Baltics, was there anyone who actually did? The Finns, who had minimal involvement with them, I suppose.
 
I'm not promising glory or wonder, just that Germany will be able to feed its population, deal with demobilisation and not collapse into chaos. Don't forget many people, from the ruling class to the industrialists to hundreds of thousands of the returning soldiers have a personal investment in the victory.

The point of my discussing Germany is to put the situation in France into that perspective. Its not one of global revolution, or collapse across both sides, but one of French internal chaos in the face of apparent German stability - so will be somewhat like 1871.
 
But they were not trying to keep down an entire continent, they had even be forced to retreat from Turkey and Russia and were basically paralizated and shocked for 20 years after the end of the war, always on the brink.

No, they were just trying to keep down their massive colonial empire.

That happend at cause of the war

If you mean "because of the war", since what you wrote makes no sense in English, then the timing is still relevant. Russia had its revolution during the war while you propose Germany to have this situation after the war.

Like the new nation out of B-L? Or whatever will become of the A-H empire?

Shifting goalposts. You are trying to prove that the uprisings will happen in Germany itself. And besides, with Mitteleuropa there is no vacuum of power in Central-Eastern Europe.

No just decline, paralysis, some piece getting out, loss of credibility of the current system that allowed idea like fascist and communism to be seen as viable...and this in the most modern, stable and democratic nation of the planet...much much less touched by the war than Germany

But no massive fascist or socialist rebellions, or civil war or the fall of the ruling system, all the while they were holding on to the biggest empire in human history.

And Germany supposedly can`t handle holding on to some of Eastern Europe?

Blockade are much much more cheaper

Not being at war and continuing on with trade is cheaper still. By several orders of magnitude.

I say that Germany late war victory mean overextending herself and yes, this mean collapse under it's own weight...

So you always claim, and yet are never able to prove.

and regarding people not claiming that, please reread the various post.

Whose posts?

Strip east europe of iron, coal and industry? Force harsh term on France through occupation and forced change of a political system that German like? That's are not simple, quick or cheap things to do.

Again, whose posts?

Sure, Germany was on a worse situation than Russia, because for all her destruction the URSS was united politically and totally behind...or better under one leader, hell the Great Patriottic War was an enourmous nation building effort.

Are you trying to make me laugh? Germany would be worse off than Russia after WWII? Do you even comprehend the damage it suffered during the war? A nation that, by the (oft-disputed) official numbers lost over 10% of its population? Seriously?

Fuck, if Germany was as disunited as you claim, it would have fallen apart after the defeat it suffered IOTL.

Here? Germany had serious internal political problem, the current political system had lost a lot of credibility

So, like France and the UK... still didn`t fall under their own weight.

and people smell weakness and it's better remember that the URSS faced revolt and guerrilla warfare for a decade after the war in the entire east europe.

Nothing on the scale you claim Germany will face.

Sure they have failed, but at least the various communist nation had an ideological feag leaf to justify themselfs, much of the post B-L leaderships not.

Sure they will - money. Unlike the USSR, Germany won`t have to forcibly annihilate the upper classes of Central-Eastern Europe to replace them with "comrades".

Regarding east europeans not being an hive mind, you are right...but when you take the food from one place (Poland and Ukraine) to feed your own people...the former owner of the food start to rebels due to strange desire to not want die to famine; the following economic exploatation will surely not make any friend there, except the german appointed leaderships.

So you`re imagining that German rule of Central-Eastern Europe will be exactly like the Nazi rule of the Ukraine? :rolleyes:

Why would Germany need to confiscate food in the East if they`re trading for it on the global market? Explain that to me.

Finally soviet rule lasted even because they had the capacity to annihilate all life on this mudball...so the rest of the world really don't messed to much in their backyard

I don`t recall the USSR nuking Czechoslovakia during the Prague Spring.
 
Last edited:
Why would Germany need to confiscate food in the East if they`re trading for it on the global market? Explain that to me.

This is key - a victorious Germany will of course build their new client states and friends into an economic system, but they are not desperate for food when it is freely available and on credit in a global economy.

Britain got massive loans in the war, and is now somewhat fucked about paying them back. Germany did not, and can get a smaller percentage of those loans from banks etc who want a good return in the shorter term.
 
Top