No Schlieffen or Eastern Plan - just defence

Instead of 1914 war plan of Schlieffen/Moltke plan of attacking west first through Belgium or the often discussed here a "Germany attacks in the east" ATL, how about Germany just adopts a "completely on defence" strategy.

Germany just sits back and lets France and Russia mobilize first if they want to, makes them do the declaration of wars, and invade neutral Belgium if they need, making them look the the aggressors instead of Germany.

Sure, the Russian army would be completely mobilized when war starts but if Russia actually invaded Germany (or Austria) in strength, they might be able to defeat it in a place where Germany could actually get at it easy, instead of trying to defeat a Russian army retreating before a German advance into the interior of Russia.

In OTL Germany had been building a huge navy to do its aggressive global policy, its big enough in 1914 to handle anybody but Britain and the USA and probably big enough to handle any other two powers combined. So Germany should be able to use the several weeks before Russia can mobilize and any DOWs happen to buy up strategic supplies, dump supplies in the colonies and bring home any important merchant ships.

if 1914 Sarajevo went as OTL, and Austria attacks Serbia, and Russia mobilizes as OTL, but if then Germany waits several days before mobilizing, but not declaring war, what's Russia gonna do!, Austria is between Serbia and Russia. Russia doing anything means commiting their army to a major attack which could easily be defeated by Germany and Austria not attacking in the west.
 
you can never being in the defensive, more knowing a neutral is unrealiable( I talk about the Brits), thus Attack either West or East are the only options...
 
The trouble is Germany's mobilisation plans supposedly required Germany to attack as that was how the troop trains had been organised.
 
you can never being in the defensive, more knowing a neutral is unrealiable( I talk about the Brits), thus Attack either West or East are the only options...

Likely Britain is not going to DOW Germany if Germany isn't aggressively attacking France or Russia, some on this board believe the Britain wouldn't DOW even if Germany just refrained from attacking Belgium and launched an all out attack in the east.

So I am thinking Britain will still remain neutral.

And worst case. Britain, France and Russia all decide this is the time to take Germany down and the plan fails in its intent. Germany is still better off than OTL. France still has northern France in production sure, but Austria would still hold onto Galacia and have it still in production and without all the losses of the 1914-15 winter trying to take it back and without the 1914 Belgium aggression Germany is likely to avoid war with the USA down the road.
 
The trouble is Germany's mobilisation plans supposedly required Germany to attack as that was how the troop trains had been organised.

This would be a pre war change to those plans. The people in charge figure out that the plans rule out any diplomacy and tie Germany automatically to a total global war resembling the seven years war instead of the 1866 through 1871 limited wars so they change the plans.

and even if the pre war plans are still in place, Germany could just decide early August not to DOW anybody and not cross the border of Luxembourg and Belgium. In the 6 weeks or so it takes the Russians to mobilize and invade Germany or Austria in strength, Germany could figure out how to move a significant chunk of the army to the east in that time.
 
This would be a pre war change to those plans. The people in charge figure out that the plans rule out any diplomacy and tie Germany automatically to a total global war resembling the seven years war instead of the 1866 through 1871 limited wars so they change the plans.

and even if the pre war plans are still in place, Germany could just decide early August not to DOW anybody and not cross the border of Luxembourg and Belgium. In the 6 weeks or so it takes the Russians to mobilize and invade Germany or Austria in strength, Germany could figure out how to move a significant chunk of the army to the east in that time.

The problem is that from what I've read the entire German set up was aimed at offensive war, a way to break out from what they saw as encirclement by enemies and establish themselves as a global rather than European power.
 
Standing on the defensive isn't all it's cracked up to be. Look at the enormous damage WW1 caused Northern France, at the end of the day if you're going to get in a fight and trash the furniture you don't want it to be your furniture.
 
The problem is that from what I've read the entire German set up was aimed at offensive war, a way to break out from what they saw as encirclement by enemies and establish themselves as a global rather than European power.

Yeah the Germans have to be smarter than 1914 and realize that the Russians, French and British all have different interests and not do exactly whats going to get them all in the war at the same time, fully and unable to make peace later. (like DOW two of them, plus invade Belgium bringing in the third and setting themselvels up as the evil nation of the world)

Even if on the defence Germany initialize could start an offensive war anytime she wants if she needs if the situation is favorable (lets say Britiain is tied down with an Irish problem or something), but by committing herself to DOW France and Russia (and Belgium) anytime anyone starts to mobilize committed her to a world war when a stunning limited victory could be had (stomp down of Serbia and defeat of a Russian counter invasion of Austria and then a favorable to Germany/Austria British brokered peace).

Then Germany can go back to shooting up Hottentots, Masai and Chinese than trying to pick fights with Russians.
 
Standing on the defensive isn't all it's cracked up to be. Look at the enormous damage WW1 caused Northern France, at the end of the day if you're going to get in a fight and trash the furniture you don't want it to be your furniture.

Exactly, especially when everyone else is going onto the offensive. Germany gets a lot of shit for marching through Belgium, but France and Russia both invaded Germany directly as soon as they could and they don`t get much shit for it.
 
Standing on the defensive isn't all it's cracked up to be. Look at the enormous damage WW1 caused Northern France, at the end of the day if you're going to get in a fight and trash the furniture you don't want it to be your furniture.

Germany was able to trash OTL 1914 Nothern France but ruined Austria with the loss of Galacia, lots of train rolling stock lost there, the loss and trashing various productive areas there and enormous loses in the Carpathians in the winter of 1914-1915.
 
Exactly, especially when everyone else is going onto the offensive. Germany gets a lot of shit for marching through Belgium, but France and Russia both invaded Germany directly as soon as they could and they don`t get much shit for it.

Germany DOWed France and Russia and invaded Belgium before anybody else did anything (besides mobilize inside their own boundries) because that was their stupid Schlieffen plan. It made them look bad and yes France and Russia got to look the victim. The Frenchies were smart that way. Germany neded to find a way that mobilization did not = war.
 
Germany was able to trash OTL 1914 Nothern France but ruined Austria with the loss of Galacia, lots of train rolling stock lost there, the loss and trashing various productive areas there and enormous loses in the Carpathians in the winter of 1914-1915.

Well ideally you don't want any of your country to be fought over, see the USA for why that's a good thing but better Galacia than the Rhineland.
 
Germany DOWed France and Russia and invaded Belgium before anybody else did anything (besides mobilize inside their own boundries) because that was their stupid Schlieffen plan. It made them look bad and yes France and Russia got to look the victim. The Frenchies were smart that way. Germany neded to find a way that mobilization did not = war.

But they wanted a war, they were entirely oriented towards the offensive. They had spent the previouscouple of decades provoking and alienating their neighbours, the leadership wanted to be a world power; the Schleiffen plan was revised and reviewed a number of times but never basically questioned because it fitted in with the goals of Imperial Germany.
 
Instead of 1914 war plan of Schlieffen/Moltke plan of attacking west first through Belgium or the often discussed here a "Germany attacks in the east" ATL, how about Germany just adopts a "completely on defence" strategy.

Someone brought up a version of this as a strategy for the wargame, "Guns of August," except in that one, he turtled on the Western Front, but attacked on the Eastern Front. It worked in the game...

Would it work in reality?
 
Yes

The German war plan assumed that they could easily defeat France (as in 1870/71) and then turn to the "tough" Russian enemy. They assumed they could NOT win a prolonged two front war - they could beat France and Russia if fighting one, but not both (which proved true).

The Russians attacked and were beaten by only a few German troops at Tannenberg. But Germany could NOT follow up.

Assume the bulk of the German army was east and not west. Then a push at Moscow/Petrograd (or simply defeating ENOUGH russian troops) could throw Russia out of the war.

Then Germany would probably have enough troops to fight a standstill in the west (south and Southeast) theaters.

But it would depend on two things

1. can Russia be defeated in short time.

2. does France attack in strength and smash German defenses there.
 
Germany DOWed France and Russia and invaded Belgium before anybody else did anything (besides mobilize inside their own boundries) because that was their stupid Schlieffen plan.

There was no Schlieffen plan in all actuality. By that time the plan was significantly changed and IIRC plan itself was fatally flawed as even the author himself conceded before his death. Moltke also knew this and adjusted the plan until it was barely recognizable at all.

Germany could never accept defensive strategy. At that period the only way seen to guarantee the victory in the war was to establish yourself on enemy territory and negotiate from position of strength. To achieve this required initiative and mobilization ahead of the enemy. Delaying the mobilization would be something akin to US president or Soviet Premier learning of nuclear missiles flying toward his country and withholding response - unthinkable.

Britain staying out of the war would damage their prestige and credibility so much that they could never be trusted again. French defense plans relied on British forces to hold vital parts of northern front and to British navy holding German navy in check since 1911 and British could not extract themselves from this without saying 'Sc*ew you, French, we are going home!', effectively siding with Germany, which is hardly in British interest.

In short, Germany electing to stay on defense would require POD that would so fundamentally alter the perception of war for them (and quite possibly everyone else) to possibly butterfly away the Great War itself.
 
Top