Coulsdon Eagle

Monthly Donor
Putting people first is a non-partisan idea.

I think even Conservative German politicians would wise up to that, especially in light of the Second French Revolution.
But not something Bismarck made through altruism. It was a cold calculated political decision, as most of his were. If he had lasted beyond 1890 he may have found himself outflanked by Wilhelm II on social reform, pushing Bismarck beyond what the latter considered an acceptable price.
 
Its the german general stuff, they most certainly will do dumb shit, but relaying on static defense is most certainly not one them.

France and Germany are different just because Kaiserreich needs to do stuff for balance reasons, doesn't mean that history plays out like that ;)
 
Otto von Bismark, arch-conservative that he was, also made concessions to the German workers - concessions that had been requested by the nascent socialist movement. His goal was to undercut any revolutionary movements and weaken the socialists - clearly the system as-is could respond to the workers, there was no need for big changes, right?

It worked, and there's no reason that the conservative German aristocracy couldn't do it again. Give the socialists "enough" of the smaller requests, and you avoid having to make bigger changes.
Well, I'd certainly hope so. @AlexG , this ties in with your comment- I suppose the Conservatives would appeal to their military constituency.
With regard to Germany focusing a bit too much on their infantry and the Stormtrooper Corps...don't diss the infantry. Modern historians in hindsight actually regard the role of armor in the German victories in France in 1940 as exaggerated. While concentrating armored forces to spearhead breakthroughs was a revolutionary idea, the role of well-trained, well-equipped, and well-led infantry forces in actually exploiting any breakthroughs was equally as important.
Huh- didn't actually know that! An excellent point, though. As I've said, tanks will come along, just not in their OTL history.
What about the US? They definitely have the resources to fund tank development, and I would think the rather poor performance of the US Army against the Mexicans outside of Vera Cruz would provide the motivation to try and develop a weapon capable of defeating trench lines. It should also be much easier to get defense funding out of Congress ITL than it was IOTL as with Germany ascendant in Europe and Japan on the march in Asia, the global situation seems much more threatening to the US than it was IOTL.
Normally, I would agree with you- but there's a twist coming with regards to Mexico that will mean the war ends before American tanks can hit the ground.
Actually among the CO, Austria had the best ore-1915 tank research program that went dead due to the war. Among the former CO Austria would be leading the charge in terms of tank development
Besides The UK, Russia also had research into the area. The ottomans had also showed a lot of interest into it because of the flat terrain if mesopotamia and the Levant.

*CP autocorrect hates me.
I'm not dismissing that- I'm sure Danubian tanks will have a good reputation once they get going- but with the Great War having been won through infantry and artillery there's no combat precedent for tanks. Right now, Danubia's in no position to be building them- just surviving is proving enough of a challenge. As for the Ottomans, well, they're at peace and naturally want to cut expenditure to start tackling their debt to the Germans, which hasn't gone anywhere. Italy has mountainous borders with France and Danubia, that's not good tank country at all Germany is congratulating itself for the success of the Sturmtruppenkorps, while no one else is really in a position to build them.

I've said before, tanks will come in TTL, but they will be delayed.

But not something Bismarck made through altruism. It was a cold calculated political decision, as most of his were. If he had lasted beyond 1890 he may have found himself outflanked by Wilhelm II on social reform, pushing Bismarck beyond what the latter considered an acceptable price.
Oh, that's most certainly the same situation as here- few politicians ever do anything out of the goodness of their heart, and TTL is no different.
Its the german general stuff, they most certainly will do dumb shit, but relaying on static defense is most certainly not one them.

France and Germany are different just because Kaiserreich needs to do stuff for balance reasons, doesn't mean that history plays out like that ;)

No one said Germany would make the same complacency mistake that France did.
No one did. The German Empire, like its Prussian predecessor, loves to plan for everything- I'm sure the men with red stripes on their trousers are sitting in offices in Berlin, making constituencies for war with revolutionary France, for a revolt in the East, for war with Britain or even Italy, and for intervening in Danubia. The Germans will never be caught by strategic surprise, hit totally out-of-the-blue in the same way Hitler caught Stalin- but that doesn't mean they're infallible. The General Staff can make miscalculations as well.

Thanks to everyone for reading and commenting!
 
Last edited:

AlexG

Banned
What about the US? They definitely have the resources to fund tank development, and I would think the rather poor performance of the US Army against the Mexicans outside of Vera Cruz would provide the motivation to try and develop a weapon capable of defeating trench lines. It should also be much easier to get defense funding out of Congress ITL than it was IOTL as with Germany ascendant in Europe and Japan on the march in Asia, the global situation seems much more threatening to the US than it was IOTL.
Honestly if it were any other nation...I'd agree with you.

But the U.S. is not like other countries. It has historically opposed having a large military with the last 60 years being an anomaly borne out of the cold war. I'd argue that instead of investing more into new and radical technologies it would instead focus on a more reactive and defensive military that can call up more men to fight and put them in action more rapidly than in the Second Mexican-American war.

But heck, I think even that might be too much for the U.S in this time period. It just didn't like spending money on the military.
 
I recall you mentioning that Germany will want to keep Danubia alive post-civil war, even if it's at the end of a bayonet, yet at the same time, the Austrians would rather become part of Germany, so what exactly is keeping the Germans from just annexing Austria and puppeting the rest of Danubia? (save Galicia which is likely to go to Poland)
 
I recall you mentioning that Germany will want to keep Danubia alive post-civil war, even if it's at the end of a bayonet, yet at the same time, the Austrians would rather become part of Germany, so what exactly is keeping the Germans from just annexing Austria and puppeting the rest of Danubia? (save Galicia which is likely to go to Poland)
Gratitude to their ally?
Wanting to avoid negative press?
Because having seen the Hapsburgs fail to control all that territory, they wouldn't want to try it themselves?
 
I recall you mentioning that Germany will want to keep Danubia alive post-civil war, even if it's at the end of a bayonet, yet at the same time, the Austrians would rather become part of Germany, so what exactly is keeping the Germans from just annexing Austria and puppeting the rest of Danubia? (save Galicia which is likely to go to Poland)
If Austria is annexed, that creates a power vaccum in the region. Pan-Slavic nationalists will have a field day. And besides, after the sack of Vienna, no one wants a powerful, independent Hungary running loose in the area.
Gratitude to their ally?
Wanting to avoid negative press?
Because having seen the Hapsburgs fail to control all that territory, they wouldn't want to try it themselves?
^^^
Exactly this
 
I'm not dismissing that- I'm sure Danubian tanks will have a good reputation once they get going- but with the Great War having been won through infantry and artillery there's no combat precedent for tanks. Right now, Danubia's in no position to be building them- just surviving is proving enough of a challenge. As for the Ottomans, well, they're at peace and naturally want to cut expenditure to start tackling their debt to the Germans, which hasn't gone anywhere. Italy has mountainous borders with France and Danubia, that's not good tank country at all Germany is congratulating itself for the success of the Sturmtruppenkorps, while no one else is really in a position to build them.

I've said before, tanks will come in TTL, but they will be delayed.

I would say that light armored cars would be one of the things the Danubians would make, Hungary is really good territory for mobile warfare and the heavy industry areas of Danubia is still in the Loyalist hands. Armored cars have a lot of benefits versus tanks, they‘re far cheaper, faster and easier to make and they ‘re far more mobile. Of course they suffer under being glass cannons (also with a much weaker cannon compared to tanks) compared to tanks.

I expect with the Danubian focus on mobile warfare and proto-Blitzkrieg tactics that they would attempt to make them. I think tanks is unlikely to be developed but I could easily see the Danubians could also develop self moving armored artillery, which would also serve them well in Hungary. The Loyalist have the industrial edge and there’s little reason not to make Skoda build experimental weapons especially because the Loyalists doesn’t have the import restrictions which AH had in WWI. Of course that will likely result in the Germans and Danubians deciding to focus on developing light tanks, self-moving artillery and armored cars in the 20ties, which could give the Germans problems later. if their enemies goes with heavy tanks. In general I expect the Germany to develop the Blitzkrieg tactics, the Germans know they can’t afford long wars, but need short fast ones. But that also mean that Germany will focus on precision and mobile weapons like the Stuka bomber.
 

bguy

Donor
Honestly if it were any other nation...I'd agree with you.

But the U.S. is not like other countries. It has historically opposed having a large military with the last 60 years being an anomaly borne out of the cold war. I'd argue that instead of investing more into new and radical technologies it would instead focus on a more reactive and defensive military that can call up more men to fight and put them in action more rapidly than in the Second Mexican-American war.

But heck, I think even that might be too much for the U.S in this time period. It just didn't like spending money on the military.

I don't know. Historically even when isolationist feeling was running high in the US, the country was still willing to fund large military expenditures whenever it felt threatened. (Witness OTL's 1916 Naval Act (which committed the US to building 10 battleships, 6 battlecruisers, 30 submarines and 50 destroyers over a 3 year period) and the 1940 Two Ocean Navy Act (which committed the US to building 18 aircraft carriers, 7 battleships, 33 cruisers, 115 destroyers, 43 submarines, and 15000 aircraft.) And ITTL with the US facing powerful potential hostile, expansionist powers in both the Atlantic and Pacific, it should be feeling very threatened.

Now I agree that (once the war with Mexico is concluded) the lion's share of increased defense spending would go to the Navy, but the Army is bound to get some of the increased money as well.
 
If Austria is annexed, that creates a power vaccum in the region. Pan-Slavic nationalists will have a field day. And besides, after the sack of Vienna, no one wants a powerful, independent Hungary running loose in the area.

^^^
Exactly this

Honestly I hadn’t really thought about this, but with a Habsburg Polish kingdom, I could see the Danubians decide to consolidate their territory by giving Galicia to Poland, let the Czech, Slovak, Croats and Transylvanian keep their autonomy and really double down on Hungary.

But even without that I expect that Danubia will carve a German dominate Backa-Banat out of Hungary and Western Transylvania (as punishment for the shit the latter pulled). I also expect that any rebel or neutral Hungarian noble will get their land confiscated, anyone connected with the rebellion will hang unless they have retired shorty after the sack of Vienna in protest. If Austria decides to double down on Hungary I expect much of the confiscated Hungarian land will be sold to Germans or Austrians who want a farm there, maybe with a program where German freikorps soldiers who have fought for the Austrians being offered free land, while Austria ban the Hungarian language in schools and administration at least outside Transylvania. While it’s unlikely that German will grow to replace Hungarian, they could in significant increase the German speaking population of the Hungarian core (which in OTL was 10%).
 
Last edited:

AlexG

Banned
I don't know. Historically even when isolationist feeling was running high in the US, the country was still willing to fund large military expenditures whenever it felt threatened. (Witness OTL's 1916 Naval Act (which committed the US to building 10 battleships, 6 battlecruisers, 30 submarines and 50 destroyers over a 3 year period) and the 1940 Two Ocean Navy Act (which committed the US to building 18 aircraft carriers, 7 battleships, 33 cruisers, 115 destroyers, 43 submarines, and 15000 aircraft.) And ITTL with the US facing powerful potential hostile, expansionist powers in both the Atlantic and Pacific, it should be feeling very threatened.

Now I agree that (once the war with Mexico is concluded) the lion's share of increased defense spending would go to the Navy, but the Army is bound to get some of the increased money as well.
I agree with your point about Naval spending, but with regards to your point about the army..I agree if you mean that the army will essentially get the scraps off of the metaphorical meal that the Navy will be getting.

Honestly, I think the U.S. would be more worried about Communism than the Germans coming over and conquering them, and given that the Dijon uprising began with disaffected army units...I'd say the BOI might gain power more or at least as quickly as it did IOTL given the red scare. Possibly at the expense of the army...
 
Dear readers,
Happy Turkey-stan!
(Sorry, I'll see myself out!)


On a more serious note, family and things are taking up today, so we're looking at an update on... Monday? Time to take a look at the mess the British Raj is in!
And of course, since it's Thanksgiving, I want to express my gratitude for you taking the time out of your day to read my work and give me feedback... there's nothing I appreciate more!
 
:)
Very appropriate. Conveys exactly the kind of "tragic" atmosphere I was looking for

It is fitting. Karl has after all been beatified by the Catholic Church, and at a time when there is more prejudice against royal candidates than was once the case. But Karl was the real deal. "He is the only decent man to have appeared in this war, and he was not listened to." - Anatole France

And because he was the real deal, he ended up a tragic figure - in our timeline, and seemingly in this one, too.
 
It is fitting. Karl has after all been beatified by the Catholic Church, and at a time when there is more prejudice against royal candidates than was once the case. But Karl was the real deal. "He is the only decent man to have appeared in this war, and he was not listened to." - Anatole France

And because he was the real deal, he ended up a tragic figure - in our timeline, and seemingly in this one, too.
Agreed. Since he's my patron Beatus IRL, I wanted to do something fitting and memorable with him.
And TTL, he's a saint with three miracles attributed to him!
 
I recall you mentioning that Germany will want to keep Danubia alive post-civil war, even if it's at the end of a bayonet, yet at the same time, the Austrians would rather become part of Germany, so what exactly is keeping the Germans from just annexing Austria and puppeting the rest of Danubia? (save Galicia which is likely to go to Poland)
Bohemia.

Bohemia in Danubia is a German-ish territory that is okay with that.
Bohemia independent is a gross insult to Germans everywhere (at least in terms of prestige).
Bohemia in Germany is a headache.
 
Top