True, although there are all sorts of games that she can play
with payments and the like. As OTL Germany post-war shows us.
Germany got away with the games because the Allies forgot to occupy Germany. I assumed that a victorious French and Russians weren't that stupid and there's no idealistic Americans to get in the way
Depending on what you consider heavy weaponry, France's arsenal was very limited. Not enough to make a significant difference IMVHO. Although judging on the OTL performance of the German army in the East they won't need it. The thing is, Russia's army hasn't yet been discredited as it was IOTL. So far they've lost at Tannenberg but have also won against Austria. Consequently, if Germany's demands too much Russia doesn't have to accept and the threat of renewed hostilities will carry more weight ITTL.
Depends on when the Russians accept defeat. They might go for a negotiated settlement or the Germans might feel the need to push them back or the Russians hadn't accepted that they had lost until Germany pushed them back. I assumed the latter. Your case is possible as well
Austria's performance was badly affected by changing mobilization plans halfway through. Even so, they were pretty bad. However, they were already anxious of loosing their independence of action IOTL and with Russia neutralized they will be able to do what they will in the Balkans. Austria jealously guarded their ability to act in the region pre-war. They'd never give up that independence willingly.
Austria's army is pretty bad even without the wacky mobilization. Certainly no where near the German Army or the Russians. She's really not in much of a bargaining position.
Might try a side deal with Russia to limit Germany, but that's going to be a hard game to pull off.
The Russians won't be in Berlin even in a quick victory. The best they could hope for is the east bank of the Vistula with a heavily entrenched German force on the other side.
That's unlikely in a quick victory scenario. In a quick victory, the Germans have suffered heavy casualties in the West and have probably seen their Army collapse due to French counterattacks succeeding. I'm thinking that everything goes right for the side that wins quickly-
The French manage to parry the German attack. Say, like they ditch Plan XXVII and fight a defensive, changed their uniforms and let the German attacks break against their lines and counter attack a vastly weakened Germany that's also lost in the East. That the Russians have piles of ammo and nothing in their way
The road to Berlin and Vienna is open. The Russians march in unopposed.
Again, you might have a different end game
Again, why would they WANT to occupy all of Austria-Hungary? All they want is Austria to surrender certain territories to them and Serbia and then stay nice and stable, albeit weak. Maybe they'd break Hungary away from Austria but I doubt it.
Armies are going to advance until they have to stop. With no army in the field to oppose them, why wouldn't they march on Vienna to impose terms? You have to grab as much as you can to intimidate your allies at the conference
They won't take Berlin and Vienna though.
I think they will
They'll have to dictate terms Germany can accept. Germany hasn't suffered a revolution ITTL and will be able to refuse terms they find unacceptable even at the price of continuing the war. For what it's worth I think france will drop the Russian alliance once Germany has been defeated. The sole purpose of it was to counter German superiority in industry and population.
Don't have to worry about the Germans, the defeated country isn't going to have an army left. Its like the French in WW2- you just go and sign the paper if it ends in an armistice at all.
Well the Germans can always do what they did IOTL and scuttle the fleet. Which they'd do before handing it over to the Russians. Germany won't accept the partitioning of the Reich and, as I've said before, the Allies won't be in a position to force something like that on Germany. If it's clear Germany will loose Britain won't conclude a separate peace they'll stick with the Allies and try to get what they can at the peace table.
Why would they do that? In a quick victory, they aren't going to need peace with Britain. The British would only have their lousy six divisions and the French and Russians are going to have 200 marching through Germany. The Germans are going to want peace with the invaders and if France and Russia demand their fleet, hey, turn it over before they start burning the country
I think that is certain. The way I see it a quick victory will be defeating the enemy armies in the field but it won't mean full scale occupation. The winners will take chunks of territory and impose heavy penalties but it won't be anywhere near the scale of the OTL post-war proposals.
I see a quick victory more like WW2, where the losers have their whole armies captured and nothing left to put in the field
Agreed on how but I think Russia would ask for terms relatively soon afterward. Probably only time for a single German offensive eastward before winter sets in and Russia broaches peace.
Possible but I think that the Germans will want to push the Russians back before the talks
I think it's more likely Russia wins at Massurian Lakes and Prittwitz retreats across the Vistula where he sets up a strong defensive position while German reinforcements come in. This was actually the OTL German plan for the East. They changed it at the last minute which led to Hindenburg and Ludendorf and the victory at Tannenberg. Pair that with a different Marne where the First Army is cut off and I think Germany would have to retreat in the West as well. That could be enough to cause Germany to ask for terms.
I see a quick victory because everything goes the victors way- the French counterattacks push the Germans to the Rhine and they can't get everyone across while the Russians bag the 8th army and there's no reinforcements to be had
They might jump in at the very end for some spoils but I tend to think you're correct.
Hard to say how quickly the end comes and how much time people have to predict it. But the neutrals will jump the second the see an ending. Like once, the Russians had captured the Austrian army, the Romanians and Italians are going to grab what they can. Leads to the complete collapse- like why I'm thinking the terms are going to be brutal
Why wouldn't they want a strong Austria? Germany outclasses Austria in pretty much every way so a stronger Austria isn't a threat. I agree with regards to Italy. Although something like 90% (IIRC) of Italy's pre-war coal imports came from Britain which is a significant point of leverage.
Why would they need a strong Austria on their Southern border?
The Germans, or rather the Hohenzollerans, might think that the only thing left to worry about is the Hapsburg's trying to rally the minor states against them.
Unlikely in 1914 but you have to plan for the future
They'd back France without question. A strong France isn't actually much of a threat. A strong Russia is something they'd oppose vehemently.
Not so sure on this one. England fought many wars against the French and always feared her. You can invade England from France, you can't from Russia. I really see England losing no matter what in a quick victory. She's just not going to have much say on the continent
Any scenario is bad- and if you then back the French against the Russians and the French do actually drive the Russians back, then what's your card?
BTW, the more I think about it, France might be in much better shape than I thought before. In a quick victory, she is likely to have captured mountains of German equipment making her far stronger
I think we're running into a problem. We have different views of how a short war would go which is colouring our opinions of the peace. How about this; you give us a run through of how you think the war would go and I'll give you mine. That should give us a better place to build the discussion from.
Yes that could be the problem.
For a quick German victory- The Germans manage to break through the French line forcing the English to retreat towards the coast and the Fifth Army is forced to surrender. The entire French line then collapses in panic and the Germans capture it all (quick victories usually require someone to panic)
In the East, the Austrians do a better job of parrying the Russians while winning in Prussia OTL. Then, freed of any French threat, they pour it on the Russians.
For a quick allied victory- I think it would take the French (yeah I know its the French) changing their strategy completely. Accept the German attack while slowly falling back and fighting rear guard actions. Inflicting pretty severe casualties, they wait for the Russians.
On the Eastern Front, the Russians manage to trap the Austrians collapsing their entire army while winning in Prussia.
When the Germans are forced to turn towards the east, the French collapse the German lines in the west.
There are other ways- like the Russians not running out of ammo but the Germans doing so.
But no matter what POD (and prewar ones are best for a quick victory), the loser basically doesn't have an army left- like France 1941
You raise a lot of good points. I see a crushing victory while your seeing one not as bad More of negotiated peace. That opens a lot of games. Such as an Anglo German alliance to save the Reich from complete collapse. Not sure this is possible like it was in the 1700s since events are going to move fast, but Europe knows that their allies must never win
