[Question edited, see OP]By 1914 - who was the most militarily competent&prepared?
- Thread starter mlp
- Start date
Russia, Japan and Ottoman Empire had the most recent war experience, and each of them had already experienced attritional trench warfare with tremendous amounts of artillery fire.
In terms of readiness Russians had the best cavalry tactics (emphasizing dismounted combat), but weakest artillery. Their infantry still relied too much on shock tactics as well. On the other hand they had understood the importance of machine guns, and had more of them per unit than any other European army in 1914.
I'd rank Russia to a tied first place with Germany, despite their material deficiencies and troubles with high command. They made short work of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman formations set against them, and their defeats against Germans had more to do with blunders of high command rather than lack of preparedness.
On a second thought I'd reply Japan. Recent war experience + solid war objectives which were met 100% with minimal casualties.
In terms of readiness Russians had the best cavalry tactics (emphasizing dismounted combat), but weakest artillery. Their infantry still relied too much on shock tactics as well. On the other hand they had understood the importance of machine guns, and had more of them per unit than any other European army in 1914.
I'd rank Russia to a tied first place with Germany, despite their material deficiencies and troubles with high command. They made short work of the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman formations set against them, and their defeats against Germans had more to do with blunders of high command rather than lack of preparedness.
On a second thought I'd reply Japan. Recent war experience + solid war objectives which were met 100% with minimal casualties.
Japan
Their forces were all suited for the tasks they were expected to fulfil, well trained and combat experienced.
Of the major players.
The RN had the best organisation, logistic infrastructure and was not only the biggest, but the best balanced, its superiority in destroyers and light cruisers being large. It was to suffer from a few doctrinal flaws and an habit of exposing obsolete ships to excessive danger losing old hulls, but also their crews. One should notice that in the 1915 Dardanelles campaign only the allies lost six predreadnoughs sunk, as many as those of the Russian navy that were sunk at Tsushima.
The German army was to remain the most effective among the ground forces up to 1917, but had set goals that were way to ambitious.
Their forces were all suited for the tasks they were expected to fulfil, well trained and combat experienced.
Of the major players.
The RN had the best organisation, logistic infrastructure and was not only the biggest, but the best balanced, its superiority in destroyers and light cruisers being large. It was to suffer from a few doctrinal flaws and an habit of exposing obsolete ships to excessive danger losing old hulls, but also their crews. One should notice that in the 1915 Dardanelles campaign only the allies lost six predreadnoughs sunk, as many as those of the Russian navy that were sunk at Tsushima.
The German army was to remain the most effective among the ground forces up to 1917, but had set goals that were way to ambitious.
You don't seem to have voted though! Choose one and wisely!
Done. Japan. They were the only ones that fulfilled all missions and got all they wanted.
Then they wasted it all, but that's another story.
The question is prepared for what?
Military forces are only susceptible of being evaluated relatively to the threats they face. Germany had, in absolute terms, the best army in the world. But the capability gap btw what they could do and what they had to do was widening and in 1914 they could no longer bridge it.
On the other hand other armies might not be as good in absolute terms, but were better prepared to deal with the tasks they faced.
simply because some country is the best prepared, doesn't mean they win.
ruthless mass murdering mentality and the will to starve and kill innocent civilians and even neutrals (the entente warcrime called the blockade) helped in this case.
and yes in my opinion germany was best prepared, but that only helps at the start of the war, soon the rest caught up with regards to that.
ruthless mass murdering mentality and the will to starve and kill innocent civilians and even neutrals (the entente warcrime called the blockade) helped in this case.
and yes in my opinion germany was best prepared, but that only helps at the start of the war, soon the rest caught up with regards to that.
my vote for germany for prepared and competent.
they were prepared enough to continue shooting when everyone else was out of ammo and had to ration artillery shells, the most deadly weapon of the war, because everyone expected to be "home by christmas".
as for competent... well, lets face it, austria-hungary and the ottomans did just one thing well: being a meat shield.
they were prepared enough to continue shooting when everyone else was out of ammo and had to ration artillery shells, the most deadly weapon of the war, because everyone expected to be "home by christmas".
as for competent... well, lets face it, austria-hungary and the ottomans did just one thing well: being a meat shield.
Germany
Germany was totally geared up for a Continental punch up in every conceivable way - its almost as if they planned it that way........the warmongering scum bags!!!!
France and Russia close but not close enough to deter Germany
Britain had to build a Continental army from virtually nothing and this took the better part of 3 years to do so and on land was less prepared than Belgium!
Nod to them for finishing the war with such a superb army.
Germany was totally geared up for a Continental punch up in every conceivable way - its almost as if they planned it that way........the warmongering scum bags!!!!
France and Russia close but not close enough to deter Germany
Britain had to build a Continental army from virtually nothing and this took the better part of 3 years to do so and on land was less prepared than Belgium!
Nod to them for finishing the war with such a superb army.
Deleted member 1487
I mean is this even debatable? Germany was clearly the most prepared for war and the conditions of WW1 specifically. Everyone else was playing catchup. Britain had a colonial army, France just started an artillery modernization scheme (buying Howitzers), Russia was starting its military build up, A-H was only a few years into a modernization scheme that was years from paying off, the Ottomans were recovering from two wars in the Balkans, same with Serbia/Bulgaria/Romania, and the US wasn't even trying to get ready. Germany too was in the midst of an expansion, but it was the closest to being done and judging by how quickly they adapted to the war (being the first to get their munition production sorted out) plus having the best trench equipment/training pre-war meant they were able to coast for the first 18 months of the war without major concerns. Its only after the others started catching up and overtaking German mobilization that things started becoming serious.
Well they didn't have much that they needed to do past surviving 1914 for the most part. In 1915 they chose when and where to fight and at Verdun they could have pulled back across the Meuse and not given battle. They also had unlimited access to world credit markets and imports, while Germany had none of that. So the French had the training wheels on passed 1914, while the Germans had a flat tire. Plus the French weren't alone, they had the British and Russians backing them up, while the Germans were handcuffed to the corpse that was A-H.
Grey Wolf
Donor
I went for Japan if you consider the question in the context of what they are being prepared for, and competent in - sure Japan is not prepared or competent to replace France on the Western Front, but they were supremely ready to take Tsingtao, take control of the N Pacific and run convoy escorts, everything that they might possibly be called upon to do.
I suppose one might think their not catching Von Spee is a blackspot, but IIRC he left before they joined the war, so it was always going to be a stern chase
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
I suppose one might think their not catching Von Spee is a blackspot, but IIRC he left before they joined the war, so it was always going to be a stern chase
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
I voted Germany. In terms of respective competency in 1914 it's hard to compare - there hadn't been any major wars in Europe since 1871. I'm basing my decision on the fact that Germany was able to fight a two-front war against some of the largest military powers in the world and held out successfully for quite a substantial period of time. I just can't imagine many of the other powers being able to do that - apart from maybe the US or Britain but they had a massive colonial army to back them up.
Riain
Banned
Given that Germany managed to defeat 2 Russian Armies with 1 in the East while simultaneously successfully defending their frontier from the French offensive, keeping the RN from 'Copenhagening' them at sea and conducting the most successful offensive of the war I'd suggest that Germany was the most militarily prepared on the tactical, operational and even strategic levels of war. Politically not so much, the entry of Turkey not being good enough to offset the low performance of AH and not being able to keep Italy on side.
In case people are wondering it was at the Political and Strategic levels that Germany lost the war, but only after the Allies were able to reach a reasonable level of Tactical and Operational competence.
In case people are wondering it was at the Political and Strategic levels that Germany lost the war, but only after the Allies were able to reach a reasonable level of Tactical and Operational competence.
Deleted member 1487
Really Germany only lost because of the US. They defeated the Russians, Italians, and French and it was only the intervention of the US into the war that kept the Entente in the war. Italy would have politically fallen out without US participation, the same with France. Britain was the only one able to continue without the US after 1916, but even then only at a reduced capabilities. So Germany lost the war politically/strategically in 1917 with USW. Without that the US stays out and the Entente runs out of money.