Man-Made Hell: The History of the Great War and Beyond

Is this a good timeline?

  • Yes, it's great!

    Votes: 109 58.6%
  • Yes, it has a few flaws but is still good.

    Votes: 61 32.8%
  • No, it's very implausible.

    Votes: 10 5.4%
  • No, it's boring.

    Votes: 6 3.2%

  • Total voters
    186
30 years of WW1 is not something I can believe. With the weapons and loss of life it is not like the 30 year war in the 1600's. England, France, Germany and Russia were all sick of war after 4 years no way could this go on for another 26 years
 
30 years of WW1 is not something I can believe. With the weapons and loss of life it is not like the 30 year war in the 1600's. England, France, Germany and Russia were all sick of war after 4 years no way could this go on for another 26 years
I think the author covered this in a post about how he (I'm assuming that your a guy ET, don't take offence if I'm wring) is going to try and make the reason as realistic as possible.
My current problem with keeping the Great War going on for thirty years is that the people of Europe would eventually be too demoralized to continue fighting. We saw this a bit in OTL in France, Russia, and Germany, so I plan on getting the people of the belligerents to hate each other so much that they will not rest until the enemy is defeated. It's suffice to say that once one side does defeat the other the post-war situation in Europe will not be pretty.
I wonder how the new reinforcements will affect the West.
 
Do you find what I have thus far ASB or the concept of World War One lasting thirty years ASB?
IMVHO only if it's 30 years of continued fighting, no amount of hate can support this kind of massacre as we will see a collapse of society and economy well before; something like the Korean war it's more realistic, basically there is an armistice not a peace treaty with conflict remaining in the periphery and after a period of cold war/incidents (both armed and diplomatic) a resuming of the hostility.
The 30 years count come out as the Historians normally consider the conflict from the start of the war in 1914 to the end of the second part (plus the armed conflict in between and just after as direct consequence, maybe like a Japanese-USA war) as a single event.
It's not an unheard thing, there are a lot of historian that consider the period between 1914 and 1945 a single great european civil war
Basically you need the people of Europe at time of rest so to resume the fight; you must consider that even if victorious the French Army morale will soon go down if the trech warfare continue and in OTL by the end of 1917 the Entente had no more way to secure loan to the USA.

Not that the Germans and Austrian will be in better shape, till they get the food from east europe they are starving due to the blockade and A-H is not in any shape to survive a long war (already 5 years of war will have started to show their effect).

Regarding Italy partecipation, well at the moment is a big: why they need to do it? Unless Wien decide to renege on the previous agreement (possible), they have obtained without blood, a lot of things; there is the ongoing pacification of Libya and the socialist will start to become restless with the revolution in Russia.
Neutralism will be still strong and while the Entente will offer a lot everybody will think that they will lose (or that in the best case scenario there will need a lot more time), for the CP, well frankly if Italy is added to the offensive i doubt that the Entente can survive as it's mean adding a million more troops and one big navy and in more than 5 years there has been time for a more throughfull requipment of the army than OTL rush job.
 
30 years of WW1 could feasibly come about if it settled into a sort of semi-Cold semi-Hot war on the Western Front. Both sides double down on the defensive to such an enormous extent that offensives become impossible and both sides spend decades staring at each other across no man's land and occasionally conducting trench raids or air raids. Neither side wants to back down because the Entente demands a free Belgium and Germany demands their African colonies returned, with neither side viewing the other's demands as equivalent to their own.

Belgium becomes a de facto part of Germany and the African colonies a de facto part of the British Empire.

I agree in that I can't see a high intensity war lasting for 30 years.
 
The 30 years count come out as the Historians normally consider the conflict from the start of the war in 1914 to the end of the second part (plus the armed conflict in between and just after as direct consequence, maybe like a Japanese-USA war) as a single event.
It's not an unheard thing, there are a lot of historian that consider the period between 1914 and 1945 a single great european civil war
Basically you need the people of Europe at time of rest so to resume the fight; you must consider that even if victorious the French Army morale will soon go down if the trech warfare continue and in OTL by the end of 1917 the Entente had no more way to secure loan to the USA.
30 years of WW1 could feasibly come about if it settled into a sort of semi-Cold semi-Hot war on the Western Front. Both sides double down on the defensive to such an enormous extent that offensives become impossible and both sides spend decades staring at each other across no man's land and occasionally conducting trench raids or air raids. Neither side wants to back down because the Entente demands a free Belgium and Germany demands their African colonies returned, with neither side viewing the other's demands as equivalent to their own.Belgium becomes a de facto part of Germany and the African colonies a de facto part of the British Empire.

I agree in that I can't see a high intensity war lasting for 30 years.
I too suspect that this thread is somehow about such a scenario. The negotiations for a peace break down, members of both sides remain in an uneasy truce(s) while proxy conflicts continue to pop out, enabling the appearance of continuation until the war is finally settled in 1944 with an unconditional surrender of Germany.
 
Doesn't even need to be a truce and proxy conflicts, in my opinion. The war could just grind to a halt in Europe because neither side wants to spend the lives and equipment required to break the defensive lines of their opponent, with both sides settling into a war of artillery, aircraft, skirmishing along no-man's-land, and fighting across the world's oceans.

A war with thousands dying every day could not continue for 30 years. A war that never officially ends and is only punctuated by short periods of intense action could keep going for that long.
 
Such a great detail on this... Bravo! However, let me rain a bit on your parade, about Italian matters.



First and foremost, Italy had interest in a Mediterranean policy, but not in Turkey; OTL intervention was more a Prestige matter, borne out of the idea that if Turkey is to be divided, Italy ought to partake in the spoils.

Also, the Austrians would sooner give up South Tyrol eather than Trieste - their main, fully built and well-connected, railway and naval hub for the whole Austrian Littoral. The point is, neither part would really accept that bargain; Italy because it's almost certain that A-H would try to renege, and the fear Germany would back the reliable Ally

Re
orthe fairly serious effects in case they may actually be forced to honor the deal.
Thanks for the constructive criticism! I'll be sure to make some edits after taking this into account.
 
Also, the Austrians would sooner give up South Tyrol eather than Trieste - their main, fully built and well-connected, railway and naval hub for the whole Austrian Littoral. The point is, neither part would really accept that bargain; Italy because it's almost certain that A-H would try to renege, and the fear Germany would back the reliable Ally

Re
orthe fairly serious effects in case they may actually be forced to honor the deal.
The OTL attempted Treaty between Rome and Wien to keep Italian neutrality will have seen the cession of the land west of the Isonzo and Trentino (and the island of Pelagosa), plus control of Albania...Giolitti was ready to accept that even if he know that the Austrians were almost assured to not follow that (even with the Kaiser personal assurance), the idea was that at least they will at least obtained something else like Tunisia (Albania by 1915 was already half controlled by the italians due to the collapse of the goverment).
South Tyrol is out of the question as a german ethnic dominated territory (OTL was asked for the great strategic position)
So with him as Presidente del consiglio the agreement will go trough as he is a convinced neutralist and frankly he think that the war was no good for Italy; by 1920 Wien will need to come through this treaty even if the war is still raging and this can create a big crisis as i don't see them give up any land but Germany (aka the one who call the shoot) at this stage really don't want add a fresh player in the war for Austro-Hungarian pride
 
Such a great detail on this... Bravo! However, let me rain a bit on your parade, about Italian matters.

Back in Europe the Kingdom of Italy was in an awkward situation. Italy had in fact been a member of the Central Powers since the declaration of the Triple Alliance in 1882, however, the Italians had always been the odd man out next to the sister nations of Germany and Austria-Hungary. Simply put, Italy had aligned with Berlin and Vienna because it feared the Entente and in a world where it seemed as though France could potentially lose the Great War, or at the very least, by occupied for the foreseeable future, what was the point of sending young Italian men to an early grave?


Worse yet for the Central Powers, Italy strongly desired territory within the Austro-Hungarian Empire, territory that Austria-Hungary stubbornly held onto and the growing Italian Empire enviously eyed land in Anatolia, land under the control of Germany’s ally, the Ottoman Empire. And yet despite all this, the Kingdom of Italy stayed away from the trenches possibly because of one man. This man? None other than Italian Prime Minister Giovanni Giolitti, a staunch neutralist in the face of calls to betray the Triple Alliance, some calls that were echoed within Giolitti’s very own cabinet.




Prime Minister Giovanni Giolitti of the Kingdom of Italy.


Through stalling and outright avoidance of interventionists Prime Minister Giolitti managed to avert any entrance into the Great War, a war that Giolitti argued Italy was not yet ready for. However, there was only so much that stalling alone could do to avoid combat and the popularity of Giolitti was gradually declining while the voices of the right-wing in the Liberal Union Party, voices of intervention, grew. However, Prime Minister Giolitti did find a way to satisfy the interventionists by coming to the negotiation table with Austria-Hungary over disputed land between the empires.


Similar agreements between Italy and Austria-Hungary that had been made in the past were typically not honored by the Austro-Hungarians so to trust Emperor Franz Joseph would be naive on the Italians’ part, however, what was different at the Treaty of Vienna was that the Germans oversaw negotiations as well. The entry of Italy into the Great War on behalf of the Entente could have had disastrous consequences for the Central Powers’ war effort and thus the Kaiserreich was keen on keeping Italy out, regardless of whether or not the Austrians would have to make some concessions. According to the Treaty of Vienna, which was signed on June 17th, 1915, Austria-Hungary would have to cede the area around Trieste and recognize Italian ambitions in Albania by 1920, and the German Empire agreed to make sure Vienna actually went through with the cessions to Italy in five years. There was much heated debate over the fate of South Tyrol, an Austro-Hungarian territory extremely desired by Italy, however, no agreement could be reached so it was decided that in 1920 a final solution was to be found in a second round of negotiations.


While Giovanni Giolitti had averted entrance into the Great War for the foreseeable future he could not avoid his declining popularity within his own administration and was pressured to resign on January 8th, 1916. In his place was another member of the former Giolitti administration and, thankfully a neutralist, Vittorio Emanuele Orlando.




Prime Minister Vittorio Emanuele Orlando of the Kingdom of Italy.
First and foremost, Italy had interest in a Mediterranean policy, but not in Turkey; OTL intervention was more of a Prestige matter, borne out of the idea that if Turkey is to be divided after all, Italy ought to partake in the spoils as befitting of a Great Power.

The proposed bargain would be bad for both parties, however:
The Austrians would sooner give up Trento, or even South Tyrol, rather than Trieste - the fourth city of the Empire and the main, fully built and well-connected, railway and naval hub for the whole Austrian Littoral. They would just not even promise it - OTL the most that was obtained, after much discussion, was approval for the long-desired construction of an Italian-language University in the city.
Similarly, for Italy it's guaranteed that A-H would try to renege, and there would be fear Germany would back the more reliable Ally (mostly unfounded, but only in hindsight). And assuming they actually manage to coax Austria into such a promise, it would be milked for all its worth - one group pointing to the possibility of obtaining Trieste without bloodshed, the other becoming even bolder in wanting to jump an Empire that seems very willing to give concessions.

If you really want a patch to delay Italian entry, I would advise a different pact:
- first and foremost, either it comes earlier than OTL, Italy's rearmament gets delayed, or Entente propaganda somehow is far less strong (I would say, it must happen before the end of 1914)
- Italy is given a free hand in Albania immediately (the occupation will distract them a lot)
- promise to give Trentino before 1918 (in hopes that Franz Joseph, who regarded it as his personal fiefdom, kicks the bucket soon and Tizla is somehow induced to understand that without concessions to Italy, she would go to war and bring in Romania too)
- vague promises on Trieste and South Tirol, to be discussed 'before 1920' (throw in OTL University approval for good measure)
- promise to respect Montenegrin independence, under pre-1912 borders though

This might be enough to give neutralists a few extra months to a year, before the opportunity of going to War becomes too strong to refute.
 
Such a great detail on this... Bravo! However, let me rain a bit on your parade, about Italian matters.



First and foremost, Italy had interest in a Mediterranean policy, but not in Turkey; OTL intervention was more of a Prestige matter, borne out of the idea that if Turkey is to be divided after all, Italy ought to partake in the spoils as befitting of a Great Power.

The proposed bargain would be bad for both parties, however:
The Austrians would sooner give up Trento, or even South Tyrol, rather than Trieste - the fourth city of the Empire and the main, fully built and well-connected, railway and naval hub for the whole Austrian Littoral. They would just not even promise it - OTL the most that was obtained, after much discussion, was approval for the long-desired construction of an Italian-language University in the city.
Similarly, for Italy it's guaranteed that A-H would try to renege, and there would be fear Germany would back the more reliable Ally (mostly unfounded, but only in hindsight). And assuming they actually manage to coax Austria into such a promise, it would be milked for all its worth - one group pointing to the possibility of obtaining Trieste without bloodshed, the other becoming even bolder in wanting to jump an Empire that seems very willing to give concessions.

If you really want a patch to delay Italian entry, I would advise a different pact:
- first and foremost, either it comes earlier than OTL, Italy's rearmament gets delayed, or Entente propaganda somehow is far less strong (I would say, it must happen before the end of 1914)
- Italy is given a free hand in Albania immediately (the occupation will distract them a lot)
- promise to give Trentino before 1918 (in hopes that Franz Joseph, who regarded it as his personal fiefdom, kicks the bucket soon and Tizla is somehow induced to understand that without concessions to Italy, she would go to war and bring in Romania too)
- vague promises on Trieste and South Tirol, to be discussed 'before 1920' (throw in OTL University approval for good measure)
- promise to respect Montenegrin independence, under pre-1912 borders though

This might be enough to give neutralists a few extra months to a year, before the opportunity of going to War becomes too strong to refute.
Giolitti continuing to be Presidente del Consiglio at the time of the July crisis will probably be enough, in OTL his goverment fall in March and he decided to not create another and give the place for the time being at one of his protegè/follower aka Antonio Salandra an extremely believer in going to war; without him at the helm but instead Giolitti getting the treaty signed with Austria is much more possible.

Regarding Trieste and South Tyrol, don't say nothing, give some vague promise of further compensation...there is a limit at what the italian goverment can decide/accept to believe in public and this will not be credible for nobody and can put both goverment in a corner.
 
Interlude One: The Silent Continent
Interlude I: The Silent Continent


“Your map of Africa is really quite nice. But my map of Africa lies in Europe. Here is Russia, and here... is France, and we're in the middle — that's my map of Africa.”


-Otto von Bismarck





A regiment of soldiers from German Kamerun being inspected.


When the Great European powers plunged into the deadliest war mankind has ever condemned itself to, their colonial empires in Africa were surprisingly quiet. Throughout the entire Great War combat in Africa was primarily secluded to northern Africa, which was just south of the combat in Europe. While the epic chaos of Phase Two of the Great War obviously resulted in the absence of much of Africa from the conflict in Europe, the origins of African neutrality throughout Phase One is far more obscure and and not justified by the events of Phase Two.


For much of Europe, colonial empires were the backbone of their strength. The British alone had risen to power by subjugating one fourth of the planet and nearly every European state with colonies in Africa had ambitions to expand the extent of their colonial capabilities. Even so, when war broke out in 1914 the European colonies were poorly defended, especially when it came to the German Empire. Whatever military forces that were stationed in Africa were there not to fight rival empires but to rather maintain order and oppress natives. The Europeans who resided in the colonies were not enthusiastic about participating in the Great War, and one newspaper editorial even argued that the European colonists of Africa should not fight, but rather cooperate in the oppression of local cultures.


And so, from the very beginning Africa was in an awkward situation when the Great War began and consequently shocked the entire world. But the British were preparing for war against German holdings throughout the African continent, and the Committee of Imperial Defence planned to attack a German wireless station in the city of Dar Es-Salaam in German East Africa. However, the British prioritized the war against Germany in Europe over capturing any overseas colonial holdings and therefore Great Britain would have to rely on local colonial settlers to invade the German Empire’s territory in Africa.


The leading force in such an operation would be the Union of South Africa, a British dominion that inhabited the southernmost region of Africa and bordered German Southwest Africa. Since 1910 the leader of South Africa had been Prime Minister Louis Botha, who had fought in the name of the South African Republic, a nation inhabited by the Dutch-descended Boers of South Africa, against the British Empire. When the Great War broke out in Europe, however, Prime Minister Botha’s administration was seeking out further cooperation with Great Britain and Botha ensured the British that the Union of South Africa would participate in the Great War against Germany.




Prime Minister Louis Botha of the Union of South Africa.


While the government of South Africa was supportive of an invasion of German South West Africa, many Boers despised the very idea of fighting for the British imperialists who had forced them to swear allegiance to the Union Jack. To make matters worse, the German Empire had actually supported the Boer states in the Second Boer War and all of a sudden the conquerors of the Boers were ordering them to fight their former allies. As the South African military mobilized against Germany, anti-war sentiment amongst the Boers would grow as an awkward peace between South Africa and Germany occurred during a time of mobilization in Africa while the first invasions in Europe began. No fighting between the belligerents of the Great War happened in Africa throughout the August of 1914 and in this time period Boer opposition to the war effort increased and meetings between Boer secessionist movements occurred under the nose of the South African government.


By the time the September of 1914 began Louis Botha was still preparing for the invasion of German South West Africa, however, under advision from military commanders and Boers in the South African House of Assembly and Senate, hold off from going to war for the time being. On September 15th, 1914 two Boer generals, Christiaan Frederick Beyers and Koos de la Rey agreed to meet with Jan Kemp, another former Boer veteran of the Second Boer War who had amassed a force of two thousand trained men, in Potchefstroom.


To this day, it is not known what the true purpose of this meeting was. According to the government of South Africa, it was believed that the three military leaders were plotting to instigate a Boer rebellion while General Beyers claimed that the purpose was to encourage the resignation of Boer commanders from the South African military in protest of the upcoming war against the German Empire. On the way to the meeting, however, disaster struck. The car of Koos de la Rey was fired upon by a policeman and as a consequence De la Rey was killed. At the general’s funeral, rumors arose that the assassination was a plot of the government of South Africa, which further fueled the flames of the anti-war fire. If Louis Botha took no action, an open rebellion in South Africa could very well be just around the corner.


As September continued so did the uneasy peace between the Union of South Africa and German South West Africa. If South Africa went to war at this particular moment, the Boers would surely rise up in revolt. Regardless of the internal unrest within South Africa, Louis Botha assured the British that the Union of South Africa would aid Great Britain in the Great War and that an invasion of German South West Africa was still planned. Prime Minister Botha would promote going to war against Germany throughout the September of 1914 and pro-war propaganda sprouted up throughout South Africa. However, activities did not raise much support for the Great War and the Boers were only increasingly frustrated by the increasingly militant Botha.


Tensions between the Boers and Botha administration would reach a boiling point on September 29th, 1918 when Louis Botha was giving a speech in support of the Great War in Johannesburg. While the speech primarily attracted pro-war sympathizers a sizeable amount of protesters also resides in the crowd, one of which hated Louis Botha enough to bring a pistol and aim it at the prime minister’s head. Just a few minutes into Prime Minister Botha’s speech, two gunshots rang through the crowd in Johannesburg while Louis Botha laid dying on the ground while excessively bleeding. The man who had assassinated Botha was immediately arrested, but he had carried out his task. Louis Botha was never rushed to a hospital, for the wounds that had been inflicted upon him were so fatal that within just a few minutes the first prime minister of the Union of South Africa was declared dead.


After the assassination and consequential death of Louis Botha, a successor had to be found. While Jan Smuts was a popular choice, he was a supporter of the Great War like Botha and would likely only further infuriate the Boers. Instead, the South African Party selected Barry Hertzog as the successor of Louis Botha. Hertzog was critical of South African intervention in the Great War and ever since the end of the Second Boer War pursued a political career in fending off British imperialism towards the Boers, and was therefore very popular amongst the South African anti-war movement. Of course, Barry Hertzog wasn’t as popular amongst supporters of the Great War, including those within the South African Party, however, with a potential civil war looming over South Africa it was agreed that a man like Hertzog was needed and on September 30th, 1914 Barry Hertzog became the prime minister of the Union of South Africa.




Prime Minister Barry Hertzog of the Union of South Africa.


Prime Minister Hertzog quickly made it clear that he intended to continue cooperation with Great Britain, however, announced that the Union of South Africa would not go to war with the German Empire, at least against its African colonies, citing the immense unpopularity of the Great War amongst Boers. The British were infuriated that one of their dominions dared to not fight during one of the British Empire’s darkest hours, however, there wasn't really anything the United Kingdom could do to force South Africa to fight the Germans, or for that matter even punish Hertzog for refusing to go to war.


Prime Minister Hertzog would, however, ensure that the Great War would stay out of Sub-Saharan Africa. Hertzog would propose a meeting between representatives of the Entente and Germany to negotiate an agreement over the fate of warfare on the African continent. On October 7th, 1914 ambassadors of Great Britain, France, Belgium, Germany, and their respective African colonies arrived in Bloemfontein to reach an agreement that would maintain peace in Africa when Europe was plunged into death and destruction. While the Entente was insistent that it was the duty of their colonies to carry out the war effort in Africa, colonial representatives argued that it was within the interests of all colonies to maintain peace for the sake of suppressing native uprisings and the German Empire, which was geographically encased in enemy powers on all sides in Africa, supported colonial interests.


Days would pass in Bloemfontein with no formal agreement being reached. However, the Belgian delegation, which represented the exiled Belgian government in the Belgian Congo, concluded that suppressing local uprisings was a greater priority than continuing to carry out the Great War in Africa. Eventually, Britain and France would give into the demands of other delegates and on October 11th, 1914 the Treaty of Bloemfontein was signed, which proclaimed that no belligerents of the Great War would conduct direct warfare against their opponents in Africa unless a colony openly announced an end to its own neutrality in the Great War. However, all colonies would still be exploited for resources during the Great War and African soldiers could still be sent off to fight in Europe. For most in Africa, the Treaty of Bloemfontein was a victory. The German colonial empire would live on to see another day while the Boers of the Union of South Africa had finally achieved the neutrality that they desired. The majority of Europeans residing in Africa at the time were supportive of the Treaty of Bloemfontein and were happy that the bloodshed of Europe would be kept as far away from them as possible, while throughout European communities in Africa Prime Minister Barry Hertzog was declared a bringer of peace.


Of course, the Great War was not completely kept out of Africa. When the Ottoman Empire declared war on the Entente later in the October of 1914, the Sultan promised Germany that the Treaty of Bloemfontein would be respected, however, on October 30th, 1914 the Kingdom of Egypt, a British colony, declared war on the Ottomans after intense pressure from London as well as a massive Ottoman military buildup on the Egyptian-Ottoman border. From this point forward, Egypt and later Anglo-Egyptian Sudan would fight the Turks, with the Sinai Peninsula being used by the British as a place to deploy soldiers and fight the Ottomans.




British soldiers in front of the Sphinx and Pyramid of Giza in Egypt, circa 1916.


The rest of Africa would also experience at least some combat in the Great War, albeit no direct confrontations with major belligerents. Instead, nationalists seized the opportunity to break the chains of imperialist oppression when the occupiers of their homelands were distracted by the affairs in Europe. Throughout all of the Great War northern French colonies were plagued by Berber revolts that were usually suppressed by local armed forces. The Zaian Confederation in Morocco was actually funded by the Central Powers, mostly through intel and even a bit of leftover supplies, especially after Germany and Austria-Hungary were relieved of the war against Russia in 1918. Through vicious guerrilla tactics, as well as indirect aid from the Central Powers (which was technically permitted under the Treaty of Bloemfontein) the Zaian Confederation held on throughout all of Phase One and by the time chaos and revolution gripped revolution following the dawn of Phase Two the Zaian people were ready to intensify the fight for their liberation.


Throughout much of Africa, especially the French colonial empire, uprisings were small, yet common throughout the Great War and would often receive a bit of funding from the Central Powers. By 1919 a handful of guerrillas were persistently holding out and if Paris was captured the French feared that their colonial empire would explode into revolution and secession once the head was cut off the snake of imperialism. The British Empire, which could spare more men and resources, was considerably more stable, and Barry Hertzog even offered to deploy South African volunteer militias throughout Africa to suppress revolts, however, a few revolutions still held out. For example, throughout much of 1916 the Sultanate of Darfur, a British protectorate, would go to war with Great Britain following a dispute between the Sultan and the British, however, within a few months after the rebellion began in March the Sultanate of Darfur was defeated in the November of 1916 and was absorbed into Anglo-Egyptian Sudan.




An Anglo-Egyptian camel soldier of the Anglo-Egyptian Darfur Expedition.


Phase One of the Great War was a surprisingly quiet time in Africa, but was also influential as well. It was anticipated that whichever side came out on top in Europe would also triumph over Africa in any peace treaty that would redraw the African borders yet again. Of course, this dramatic peace treaty would not come. The Great War lasted entire decades longer than anyone expected and Europe would be plunged into chaos and warfare the likes of which the world had never before seen. Colonial dictates would quickly become useless and soon enough African nationalists would take another shot at freedom.


The sun was setting on the European empires and the sun of liberation was rising in its place.




The King’s African Rifles battalion of British East Africa, circa 1916.
 
And here you go, the interlude that gives a quick explanation for what's going on in Africa. Assuming my current schedule continues, you can expect Chapter Three to come out in January.
 
While the epic chaos of Phase Two of the Great War obviously resulted in the absence of much of Africa from the conflict in Europe, the origins of African neutrality throughout Phase One is far more obscure and and not justified by the events of Phase Two.
This confirms the hypothesis that TTL great war will be a multi-stage conflict like the 30 year war or 100 year war. This will be interesting.
 
This confirms the hypothesis that TTL great war will be a multi-stage conflict like the 30 year war or 100 year war. This will be interesting.
Correct. Each phase will introduce new belligerents and have others leave the war, however, the war itself will never completely pause.
 
Top