Miscellaneous >1900 (Alternate) History Thread

Really? Thanks a lot. It will greatly help the tl.
I can't find the exact guy (its annoying me now) but maybe you can use Semyonov, since he wanted to create a "great mongolian state" as well as being half mongolian half Russian. If he could gain more prominence (maybe if Kolchak dies some point after taking power) then ends up being ruler of Russia then I could see him easily being influenced by Eurasian ideologists given his desires to create the mongol state it could resonate with him a lot. There is also a chance I am confusing the Eurasianst general with Semyonov but I think I recall seeing a general being labelled Eurasianst specifically and arguing russia is closer to asia but it could have been a thinker that i read about.
 
I can't find the exact guy (its annoying me now) but maybe you can use Semyonov, since he wanted to create a "great mongolian state" as well as being half mongolian half Russian. If he could gain more prominence (maybe if Kolchak dies some point after taking power) then ends up being ruler of Russia then I could see him easily being influenced by Eurasian ideologists given his desires to create the mongol state it could resonate with him a lot. There is also a chance I am confusing the Eurasianst general with Semyonov but I think I recall seeing a general being labelled Eurasianst specifically and arguing russia is closer to asia but it could have been a thinker that i read about.
Is it Ungern Sternberg?
 
Last edited:
AHC/WI: earliest possible date at which Japan could take Korea and Manchuria
Well they could likely take it earlier in the warlord era or perhaps they could set up a puppet state earlier, also it is possible that if Fengtian loses hard against Zhilli then Japan can intervene on their side and they would be more reliant on Japan to the point where it could be like a puppet
 
Well they could likely take it earlier in the warlord era or perhaps they could set up a puppet state earlier, also it is possible that if Fengtian loses hard against Zhilli then Japan can intervene on their side and they would be more reliant on Japan to the point where it could be like a puppet
What about an earlier annexation of Korea approx 1880-90?
 
I found him. Krasnov.
Yes.. its him, so you could have him take over the volunteer army like he wanted or perhaps he could begin it, then have the attack on Moscow succeed then Russia is Eurasianst. I don't know how to get communist France though.
 
If China had splitered more than OTL and never re-unified what are the best geographical areas for new post China states to emerge?
The North and South of 'China proper'.
I mean, all between Indochina, Tibet, Central Asia and the Sea.
The North has a lot of plains so that would be probably mostly united, but we would have a more divided South post-China states?
 
Hey if I planned to have a timeline that opened In Media Res starting with World War One and focused on the 20th century, but with the PoD happening centuries before then and interspaced with "flashback" chapters, would I post it here or in the pre-1900 forum?
 

Bytor

Monthly Donor
What is the general consensus of the more likely, non-ASB outcomes of a Confederate States of America that survives (or avoids) the Civil but is not the victor?

Confederate Socialist States of America ATLs after early 20th century revolutions mimicking the Russian revolutions are popular, but is that really feasible?

Is fracturing and reabsorption into the USA the most likely outcome? Or is being a poor South Africa analog with elements of maquilladora factories for the USA the most likely?

Or something else entirely?
 
Why is KuK army considered crappy in ww1?
British Propaganda? (Or Yugoslav, depending on where you get your information from. Might also be involving post-war nation building of the post war 'beak away' nations.)

More serious, A-H wasn't a first rate power, but neither was it that bad compared to some other powers involved in the war.

Things counting against the army?

Some serious strategic blunders on the highest levels of command - especially early on. Getting caught in an upgrade cycle (or more correctly, complex politics preventing the necessary funds from going to the army that it would have needed to complete them in adequate time). Complex command lines due to in fact being more like three armies in a trench coat instead of one unified army. Serious problems due to loosing too many multi-lingual officers and NCOs in the first months of the war.

Later on in the war large problems become apparent from the logistical and geographical situation. Enemies on three sides, most battles going on beyond the mountain range from the industrial and agricultural heartland with limited supply lines that became more and more worn with each month. Also: no easy access to a third party "neutral" power willing to provide supplies for cash - no Switzerland doesn't count. And a lack of shipping to facilitate such overseas purchases (and the Navy to protect them), again, mostly for geographical reasons.

Then there were contributing factors - such as not having fought a (serious) conflict since 1866. Or the fact that after the war no government remained that was interested in keeping up a positive narrative.

Still, they held their own against the Italians. They mostly kept up against the Russians after the initial disastrous 1914 performance - often outnumbered 2:1. (To be honest under an unified, German led, command.) Serbia was probably ground down more slowly than it could have been - but even at nearly 1:1 numbers of men fighting on the front they were ground down after ~16 months. (Serbia had some serious mobilisation numbers from the get go - and paid for it in probably the worst military casualties compared to overall population.)

So to conclude: There were some serious problems with the armed forces of A-H. But at the same time, they held together for four yours fighting on three fronts. Especially if one considers that pre-war army size and budget wise Italy alone was more or less the closest peer power to them, not taking into account Serbia, Russia, or the logistical, industrial and military contributions of Britain, France and the US.

(All this going from memory - take with a grain of salt, double check and all that...)
 
Top