Italian is no real object issue for me.
so those sources would be glorious and thank you for the one given
Last edited:
REDUX: Place In The Sun: What If Italy Joined The Central Powers?
- Thread starter Kaiser Wilhelm the Tenth
- Start date
so those sources would be glorious and thank you for the one given
tbf if the newer Italian officers come in I could see the Italians doing better, Cadorna really wasn't good at all.
tbf I don't see Germany giving the entirety of Macedonia back to Bulgaria considering that Greece would most likely stay Monarchical and friendly to the central powers, and taking land from a neutral power would just be a big no-no for any state wanting to stay neutral, especially since the Central Powers would just grow stronger in this scenario, not weaker, and the Royal Navy has a lot less capacity to help Venizelos due to the Regia Marina.
I think we're going to see North Macedonia to be given to the Bulgarians, as was other pieces of land like the rest of Thrace Greece held, but unless Greece switches from a neutral party to being part of the Entente I don't see Bulgaria taking much from Greece proper. Nish and Bulgarian-majority North Macedonia would be taken by the Bulgarians though.
On things post war I think if we see a Russian revolution that goes as terribly as otl one thing I'd want to see is the Americans and Japanese taking the Far East since Japan most likely would have had stayed out of the war. A Japan which has the Far East and Manchuria under their control would be strong indeed, and if they stay relatively moderate and don't fight the Chinese I could see them being really hard to contest especially if America continues to be under splendid isolation.
And @Kaiser Wilhelm the Tenth do you plan on killing off Austria-Hungary and the Ottomans?
If the Ottomans collapse I could see Bulgaria going for Constantinople while the Caucausus states flounder really (a caucausus state expanding during Russian and Turkish troubles would be interesting but I don't see it happening really). Any Arab state that pops up would be very different to what we have in otl too, considering that the Hashemites and the Wahhabis would be fighting each other, and I don't think the Arab revolt wouldn't have happened considering what we have in the story, while the Brits and French have no way to split the region post WWI. It'd probably mean terrible things happening to the ethnic and religious minorities afterwards, including the Shia minorities, which could incite conflict against Iran.
If Austria-Hungary collapses things would also be very interesting. Hungary would probably be the instigator, and the Austrians lose badly, I could see Germany writing off Austria and forming Grossdeustchland, while forming various client states in former A-H territories would be quite cool.
pls don't ban me
Monthly Donor
My bad, i intended the Greek territories considering greece as an Entente member. Also my reasoning add the fact that in OTL Greece allowed the British Military access. in can be considered as being co-belligerent. Of course, with Italy being a CP Greece would be less inclined than OTL to join the entente or grant them something. IMHO i think that they'll strictly stay neutral and not even grant the military access.
oh, i can confirm that. Ferdinand did had erotic dream of taking Costantinople ( of course renaming it as Tsarigrad). Considering the Bulgarian war crimes done in OTL i'm worried what might happen to whoever, of the citizens, tries to rebel. My personal worst theory is that Ferdinand simply expels almost all the non Bulgarian population on the other side of the Bosporus ( if i'm not mistaken less then 5% of the population was Bulgarian) and simply try to repopulate it as new capital by offering free houses and a new start to every poor Bulgarian. a more "human" one would be to "only" expel those who do not accept to adopt a Bulgarian name and become orthodox.
Its better if i stop this theories as i don't want to sound like some mad man.
Last thing i assume we all agree that if any orthodox country seizes Constantinople, the Haghia Sophia would be reinstated as a Cathedral.
I see public opinion just shifting to become more and more pro german as the fact is that Germany will start winning in 1916 means that the Brits probably won't help the Greeks. The Greeks join in the war in late 1916 after all. Maybe we'd see the Greeks fight the Bulgars and Turks post war in another free for all (especially if we see A-H collapse) but I see them being neutral in WWI and being pro-German.
tbf a Bulgarian Constantinople is very interesting, but yeah a lot of the City's citizens would be ravaged by the Bulgarians if it actually happened.
pls don't ban me
Monthly Donor
i mean... sure... but the greek army is... very weak.
rememebr that they got defeated by the turkish in 1922 with them being basically fresh after enteing ww1 the last moment while the turks have been at war since almost day1.
the greek army is what, 300k troops at best? both bulgaria and the turk greatly outnumber them singularly
I think you're underestimating the Greek army, half of the reason why this happened was that the Greeks swapped leaders and the army went through a restructuring while fighting. While it'd more likely be the monarchists that're fighting, so its leaders would be less effective the fact that the Greeks could still probably buy weapons and equipment off the combatants to fuel their war much better than the other nations which have fought for years in WWI would still allow Greece to punch above their weight.
Chapter XV- Falkenhayn's Master Plan
Chapter XV
Falkenhayn's Master Plan
If France and Italy were weary as 1916 dawned, Imperial Germany was opportunistic. 1914 had been a year of great disappointment for the men in Berlin. Decades-long professional careers had been predicated on the assumption that France would fall quickly and Russia would crumble soon after. The Schlieffen Plan had been gospel no less than what these men heard in Church every Sunday. Planning had become prophecy- and then been proven false. French offensives in December 1914 had been the first sign that all was, at the least, stable. If Germany could not break out, neither could the Entente break in. The war would now be one of attrition, won by wearing the enemy down just a little faster than he did to you.
Germany's greatest problem in 1915 was not demographics, nor industrial production or transport capacity- the Entente struggled with all these things too. No, the Germans had to contend with geography. Ought they to follow up on their victory at Tannenberg and chase the Russians across the steppes? Or should they try to reopen the battles of manoeuvre on the Western Front, stretching out to cut the British from the French? Magnificent though the capture of Poland and Serbia were, and despite the political advantages of aligning Bulgaria and Italy, the Central Powers remained boxed in. A ring of steel enclosed them, and if they did not break out, they would be suffocated. A debate now opened in the German high command on which way to break out- east, against the Tsar's rickety empire, or west, to capitalise on Italy's entry into the war and squeeze the life out of France?
Paul von Hindenburg and Erich Ludendorff were proponents of the former. Hindeburg had become a hero overnight after saving East Prussia from occupation at the Battle of Tannenberg- joined by the hero of Liege the next summer, the two achieved the first great breakthrough of the war and conquered Russian Poland. The argument for striking east was simple: the Tsar's forces had proven inferior to the Germans in every way. Their peasant conscripts had no attachment to the war and an inadequate logistical base, and were led by officers selected for loyalty to the monarch, competence be damned. Numerical advantage was the only thing keeping the Russians in the war, an advantage often negated at the operational level by mass surrenders. A second great offensive in summer 1916 could put German troops in Vilno and Minsk- and that would surely force the Tsar to sue for peace. With the menace from the East knocked out, France would face the entire European Continent with only Britain at its back. The great advantage of this strategy was that it offered an alternative from the slaughter of the West. Hindenburg and Ludendorff had played no role in repelling the autumn Entente offensives, but they had heard plenty of tales from men in the West- and besides, the map spoke for itself. Thousands of Frenchmen lay dead in Champagne and Artois and the line had moved but a few hundred metres. A similar attempt at a breakthrough would be the height of folly, especially with opportunity lying in the East.
Unfortunately, the "Eastern thinkers", for all the prestige granted them by Tannenberg, did not hold the final say. That authority fell to Erich von Falkenhayn, who held the post of Chief of the General Staff and, no less important, the Kaiser's ear. Falkenhayn's view of the conflict was simple. Like Hindenburg and Ludendorff (along with the bulk of Germany's military elite), Falkenhayn was convinced of the need for Germany to dominate Europe. He was somewhat unique, however, in viewing Britain as the main enemy. Ever since the wars of Louis XIV, London had assembled coalitions to keep any one power from mastering the Continent, often bridging considerable political divides with a well-placed loan (as evidenced by the rapprochement with traditionally hostile St. Petersburg). In this understanding, France and Russia were mere cats-paws, over whom victory would not necessarily bring stability. Even if German troops stood from Brest to the Bug, the Royal Navy could maintain its blockade and suffocate the foe year by year, or sign a nominal peace while assembling a new anti-German coalition, as it had done to Napoleon a century prior. The ring of steel was anchored, not in the mud of northern France, but the offices of London.
For all that, Falkenhayn saw no need to strike at the British themselves. He was not a Navy man, but understood that if it were possible to break their supremacy on the waves, the Kaiserliche Marine would have done it a long time ago. Command of the English Channel secured the enemy homeland from invasion better than a thousand divisions behind barbed wire. Nor did he consider it necessary to defeat the British Expeditionary Force- while it had grown in size and prowess over the last year and a half, it could never threaten the German position by itself. The route to getting British troops off of the Continent was to destroy the French Army. Once it became clear to London that the French could no longer hope to free their own home soil, the political will to keep thousands of men in the field would evaporate, if for no other reason than fear they might be cut off. That would leave Britain with no place to strike Germany except in the colonies, which Berlin had long since written off. Unrestricted submarine warfare would then bring the British economy to its knees- neutral opinion be damned- and London would have to sue for peace on Germany's terms.
Falkenhayn understood that this was not 1871. The failure of the Schlieffen Plan had proven that mobile warfare in the cramped West was impossible and that there was no immediate prospect of a mass breakthrough. Attempting to wheel through France and occupy Paris, as the Prussians had thirty-five years earlier, was a pipe dream, and to attempt it would bring only mass casualties- which would in turn diminish the attritional advantage the Germans so badly needed. Germany's great offensive for 1916 was predicated, not on seizing territory or separating the British from the French, but on sucking the French Army into a battle it could not win and destroying its fighting cohesion, the political effects of which would force France to make peace. The citadel of Verdun was selected for its strategic and psychological importance. It was one of the great cities of eastern France and had traditionally been a bastion against invasion- the coaltions against Louis XIV and Napoleon had besieged it, as had the Prussians forty-five years ago. This time, however, the fortress had sat idle- it was too far south to have been included in the Schlieffen Plan and irrelevant to any move on Paris. The artillery and garrisons protecting it had long since been moved to support offensives on the Western Front, leaving its impressive defences empty. Falkenhayn intended to swoop in and take the fort, before forcing the French to bleed themselves dry in a counteroffensive. This was to be the biggest German offensive in the West since the stalemate began, and would consume the bulk of its military resources throughout the first half of the year. Falkenhayn had conferred with the Kaiser and the rest of the General Staff, all of whom had united behind this plan. There was no provision for an offensive in Poland or Flanders, no better spot to strike the enemy. Failure at the Marne had brought endless months of stalemate, and that would not- could not- be repeated here. Victory was the only option, the only way to punch out of the ring of steel.
This was where Germany's allies came in. Falkenhayn's prewar opinion of Italian martial prowess had not been high, nor had he believed the country would be willing to fight alongside the hated Habsburgs. Having them onside was of course welcome, but like most German planners, he had viewed them as nothing more than a diversion for the French. Planning for the great Western offensive changed Falkenhayn's position, however. Yes, the Italians would never even approach the Germans in scale or quality- the carnage at Bardonnechia proved as much- but they still had a role which might change the entire course of the campaign. What better way to wear down the French than to force them to divide their forces between two separate fronts? What would the political effects be if, in their struggle to save Verdun, the French were forced to abandon Nice? Cadorna did not need to be Clausewitz to fire everything he could across the Alps and wait for the foe to collapse. The German forces in Italy, which had sat out the first battles of the war, moved up to the front. Falkenhayn made clear that the Alpenkorps was not to waste its strength in attritional fighting, but if the French broke, it was to lead the charge out of the mountains.
There was also the matter of the Corpo di Spedizione Italiano. Italy's expeditionary force, demanded by Germany as part of its Triple Alliance obligations on the outbreak of war, had sat in Turin for months, idle while their brothers died in the Alps (ostensibly due to "freight shortages" which were, Sonnino made clear, entirely the fault of Austria-Hungary). Falkenhayn had waited long enough. The CSI, he informed Cadorna, would have a key role to play in the Western offensive. Cadorna was adamant that General Armando Diaz at least be treated as an equal in the planning, as opposed to merely another subordinate corps commander. Falkenhayn had met Diaz twice since the war began and held him in high regard- though not without condescension, qualifying the praise in his diary that Diaz was "outstanding by Italian standards." Foreign Minister von Bethmann-Hollweg did his relationship with Falkenhayn no favours by imploring him not to throw the CSI into a heavy combat role- the Italo-German alliance was strained enough, the image of coffins coming back to Rome from a German offensive would do nothing good. The Foreign Minister would have caught more flak had not Falkenhayn agreed with him, albeit for different reasons. As good an officer as Diaz was, Falkenhayn did not trust the Italians with anything crucial to the offensive's success. Fortunately, five corps (equivalent to ten divisions) could hold a fair bit of territory, especially in a quiet sector. The CSI spent January 1916 taking up position at the southern extremity of the front, freeing ten good German divisions for Falkenhayn's offensive.
Operations Gericht and Aquilla- as the attacks on Verdun and Nice were codenamed- took their final forms as the New Year began. Gericht was premised around hitting Verdun from two directions: a main attack down the east bank of the Meuse conducted by the Fifth Army (plus two extra corps held in reserve), while the ten divisions released from Lorraine would make a smaller attack on the elevated west bank to disable the French artillery batteries. The operation was scheduled for 12 February and was to be preceded by a barrage of two million shells- no precise end date was ever given, but surely Falkenhayn understood how long a fight this would be. What it lacked in elegance, it would hopefully atone for in efficiency and sheer scale. Aquilla, by contrast, was pure Cadorna. Eleven Italian divisions would strike at Menton on the same day as the Germans opened up; reaching the Monaco border within two weeks and then advancing on Nice. Privately, Falkenhayn doubted the plan's potential but that did not matter- as long as more Frenchmen died than Italians, it was a win.
Such was the logic that characterised the Great War. Its greatest battle was about to begin, sucking millions into what Falkenhayn had already dubbed the Ausblutungßblacht- "bleeding to death battle." It would prove an apt name- made worse by the fact that it failed in its main task. Gericht proved a German victory, but somehow the French would find it in themselves to carry on against the odds. Small consolation for the hundreds of thousands who would die in the coming weeks.
Oh boy that's an incredibly low opinion by the Germans of the Italians. Not an overly substantiated. Let's how the alpini prove them wrong. It will be interesting how the development of both Italian and German shocktroopers. Both had very different philosophies but not incompatible and I think would create a pretty interesting rivalry
ooh Falkenhayn is back and ensuring the French fall at Verdun as per otl! I think it works very well, and I think the extra pressure of the Italians definitely would have broken the French.
I love how it talks about the French still fighting on despite the loss at Verdun. The French mutiny is a very important part of the story and I can't wait to see how you write it this time!
pls don't ban me
Monthly Donor
weak? maybe not.
heavily outnumbered? yes.
just to give you and example, in the second Balkan war, greece's army was of 150.000 soldiers.
Bulgaria peaked at 600.000
even in the turko-greek war their army never went above 250k soldiers ( 210k in 1922).
pls don't ban me
Monthly Donor
Just to add. Diaz was yes a better general than Cadorna ( especially on a human level) but... was too much cautious? in OTL he could hvae started the retake of italian land after the Piave battle much earlier. the government had to literally send him a telegram of orders to tell him " do a fucking attack" as the war was ending and italy was the only one not attacking
Diaz caution was much due to the still felt consequences of Caporetto, he basically rebuild the army from scratch as it was materially and psycologically devastated by the utter defeat and by Cadorna treatment of the soldiers (hell even first Piave, the big 'you shall not pass' moment of the italian army was an utter surprise for the brass as it was generally thought that the line was not capable of holding and preparation for the defense further south were ongoing), plus second Piave was a very costly defensive victory as A-h basically throw to Italy everything they have included the kitchen sink and frankly that was the real battle the broken the back of the K.u.K.
As a note, it's not that Diaz was a nicer man, discipline was still very harsh, the great difference was that such harshness was not arbitrary as under Cadorna and was used a less.
Ok, German opinion of their italian counterpart is nothing new and frankly expected and as personal opinion better than being throw at Verdun with the role of bullet spounge to save German soldiers.
This double offensive done in (relative secrecy) will offend Conrad and as OTL he will plan his secret offensive, in OTL was the offensive through Trentino against Italy but ITTL the target will be obviously Russia and this mean that no other offensive will be done to relieve pressure from the French, frankly this series of CP offensive can really bring Romania on their camp to share the spoil of war and being on the good side of the most probable victor.
France apparently against all odds will remain in the fight, nevertheless her situation is hardly good with a stronger offensive at Verdun and the italian offensive in the south...(at this series of event franlkly you add also a sortie by the German Navy and the big mediterrean engagement and the CP had really throw everything they had on the entente).
Italy enter the war on the CP side can have some butterfly on the internal politics of South America due to the sizeble italian immigrant community expecially in Brasil and Argentina
pls don't ban me
Monthly Donor
You know that Diaz was chosen initially as a scapegoat for Cadorna and Badoglio's mistakes.
i think that if Italy at some point decides to replace Cadorna it won't be Diaz unless a french border version of Caporetto happens ( Ventimiglia maybe?).
BTW, just to make you laugh Badoglio is the one responsible for the start of the Caporetto disaster ( he still successfully blamed the soldiers) and later in the 20's/30's Badoglio will have a fight with Balbo regarding more money to be spent for aviation saying that " aviation will never have a fundamental role in warfare" 🤣🤣🤣
Huh, interesting. I’m curious what exactly the French posture is after losing Verdun outright and the massive hole that would create on the south flank of the Western front
Could this hole encourage a northwards drive by the Italians to link up with the Germans? A wider front means more room for maneuvers and reduces the effectviness of trenchies.
How so? The Alps and Switzerland are in the way. Italians can already transit to Germany via Tyrol anyways
I think we'd just see the mutiny like we saw last time, so even though the French would like their soldiers to move back they won't bc they've mutinied (and get wrecked by the Germans, the French are just worst off for it) or something similar to that.
tbf idk how that would change things, but this reminds me of Axis of the Andes where Peru gets a native revolution and we get a reborn incan empire as most of the officer class gets killed by the Ecuadorians and the natives were the only ones that would fight.
We'd still prob see the French collapse, but seeing it actually happen is a very interesting thing especially since Italy's part of the reason why the Germans were even able to do so.
Also imagine ittl ppl thinking that wwi is unwinnable for the Brits and French bc they'll think that the Italians will join the Germans automatically.
Some great discussion here- I'm actually a little blown away by how quick you guys have been to return, so thank you all!
-1916 will be a "mirror" of OTL. Not the last year of the war, but the year in which the balance flips, and after which one side is clearly on the defensive without a path to victory, only survival. Only difference is, that's the Entente instead of the Germans.
-The Italian "cold winters" are analogous to the Turnip Winter (which does of course still happen), except that Italy is even less prepared to deal with them than Germany was. Sonnino gambled on a quick victory and failed- now he's gambling again, that Cadorna's promise of victory within a year will bear out. Come 1917, Italy will be a very grim place, certainly far worse off than it was in OTL.
-I hadn't considered the Italian Air Force as a factor here, but you're right- anything to get over the Alps. If memory serves me correctly, they were actually one of the more advanced air forces of WWI despite the small industrial base. I don't know enough to say how Caproni bombers would change the equation for Germany (but then, they have to be more effective than Zeppelins).
-Sonnino's political position became very dicey the second Italy failed to win a magic victory over Britain and France. The Battle of the Ligurian Sea and second Cold Winter worsened things, as will the failure of the coming offensive to bring victory. But his choices are to work with the Left or lose his office, and given that he is indelibly associated with the war at this point, walking away would instantly make him the worst leader in Italy's history. Regarding Mussolini: I don't want to divulge too much, but I want him to play a role here, especially since unlike 1.0, Italy's victory will be "mutilated".
-The Brusilov Offensive will still happen, but it won't be the steamroller of OTL (Czernowitz and the Bukovina mines, for example, will stay firmly under Habsburg control). I don't see Russia collapsing in 1916 just because it won't be a priority. Romania has no reason to join either side, though as you pointed out, it might join the Central Powers at the eleventh hour just to snatch Bessarabia.
-The shell crisis is worse for all sides, yeah.
-I don't have any plans for the Russian Revolution right now: a lot of it depends on when and how the Russians fall relative to the French and British. Japan is still part of the Entente, but it will sign a white peace with the Central Powers and move on unscathed. As for America... continued neutrality and isolationism is the most likely path.
-The earliest Austria-Hungary could possibly start to fall apart is 1927, when the Compromise with Hungary comes up for review (by which point both FJ and Karl will be dead). A lot will need to go wrong before then, but it's definitely within the realm of possibility. As for the Ottomans, I can actually see them doing quite well if they have a generation without the rest of Europe breathing down their necks. A lot depends on how much of Arabia and Mesopotamia the British can take before signing a peace with Germany- but it's worth noting that the Empire survived for several years after making peace with the Entente. So "killing off" is unlikely, but "reducing in size and power to a Turkish core" is definitely possible.
-I like the idea of Conrad trying his own offensive in the East and possibly colliding head-on with Brusilov!
-France will "survive" 1916 inasmuch as the death blow will have been dealt, but it will take a while for it to kill them. The political fallout and loss of manpower after losing Verdun will push them past the point of recovery.
-Your point about the domestic politics of Brazil/Argentina is very interesting and it applies to the United States as well. For a start, none of these countries are likely to join the war simply because it'll end before Unrestricted Submarine Warfare can push them over the edge (and in the American case, because there will be no Zimmerman Telegram). I know less about the South American states, but in the US, German culture was prevalent enough that people thought dual loyalties might pose an internal threat- how much more so Italian culture? Most of the Italian-Americans in the US at this point were no more than two generations removed from the Mother Country, to say nothing of those who were just born there. You have a very insular culture (for lack of a better term) with its own language and religion, one which is scorned by the White Anglo Saxon Protestants. If Mr. Schmidt in Milwaukee might possibly have disloyal sympathies because his great-grandfather came over during 1848, how will Mr. Romano take being asked to pick up a rifle and kill people born fifty miles away from his ancestral village? If Woodrow Wilson declares war on the Central Powers here, the Democratic Party can kiss the immigrant vote goodbye- and that's without touching Irish-Americans.
Expect Argentina to export a lot more foodstuffs to the Central Powers after the war at British expense.
-I'm not sure who could replace Cadorna here if it ever came to that.
-Aviation will never have a fundamental role in warfare, and these newfangled "machine-guns" ever replace the good old black-power musket!
-I don't forsee a Peruvian Revolution ITTL, though that timeline does sound intriguing.
-"Italy joins the Entente and the war lasts until November 1918? Perish the thought!"
-1916 will be a "mirror" of OTL. Not the last year of the war, but the year in which the balance flips, and after which one side is clearly on the defensive without a path to victory, only survival. Only difference is, that's the Entente instead of the Germans.
-The Italian "cold winters" are analogous to the Turnip Winter (which does of course still happen), except that Italy is even less prepared to deal with them than Germany was. Sonnino gambled on a quick victory and failed- now he's gambling again, that Cadorna's promise of victory within a year will bear out. Come 1917, Italy will be a very grim place, certainly far worse off than it was in OTL.
-I hadn't considered the Italian Air Force as a factor here, but you're right- anything to get over the Alps. If memory serves me correctly, they were actually one of the more advanced air forces of WWI despite the small industrial base. I don't know enough to say how Caproni bombers would change the equation for Germany (but then, they have to be more effective than Zeppelins).
-Sonnino's political position became very dicey the second Italy failed to win a magic victory over Britain and France. The Battle of the Ligurian Sea and second Cold Winter worsened things, as will the failure of the coming offensive to bring victory. But his choices are to work with the Left or lose his office, and given that he is indelibly associated with the war at this point, walking away would instantly make him the worst leader in Italy's history. Regarding Mussolini: I don't want to divulge too much, but I want him to play a role here, especially since unlike 1.0, Italy's victory will be "mutilated".
-The Brusilov Offensive will still happen, but it won't be the steamroller of OTL (Czernowitz and the Bukovina mines, for example, will stay firmly under Habsburg control). I don't see Russia collapsing in 1916 just because it won't be a priority. Romania has no reason to join either side, though as you pointed out, it might join the Central Powers at the eleventh hour just to snatch Bessarabia.
-The shell crisis is worse for all sides, yeah.
Bulgaria joined the war and got its piece of Serbia like OTL. The difference is, the Allies figured the Balkans were a lost cause and pulled out of Salonika in January 1916, leaving Bulgaria with no one to fight. Nor is there any appetite in Greece to join the Entente. Currently, Bulgaria is nominally at war while returning to as much of a peacetime economy as possible.
-The Central Powers will honor Greek neutrality; while Bulgaria will get North Macedonia and Nish, Greece will lose no territory.
-I don't have any plans for the Russian Revolution right now: a lot of it depends on when and how the Russians fall relative to the French and British. Japan is still part of the Entente, but it will sign a white peace with the Central Powers and move on unscathed. As for America... continued neutrality and isolationism is the most likely path.
-The earliest Austria-Hungary could possibly start to fall apart is 1927, when the Compromise with Hungary comes up for review (by which point both FJ and Karl will be dead). A lot will need to go wrong before then, but it's definitely within the realm of possibility. As for the Ottomans, I can actually see them doing quite well if they have a generation without the rest of Europe breathing down their necks. A lot depends on how much of Arabia and Mesopotamia the British can take before signing a peace with Germany- but it's worth noting that the Empire survived for several years after making peace with the Entente. So "killing off" is unlikely, but "reducing in size and power to a Turkish core" is definitely possible.
A Greco-Bulgarian War down the line is definitely possible, but I can't see the Bulgarians trying to conquer Constantinople.
Not to spoil anything, but the Italians are about to sink even lower in German eyes- not entirely their fault, either. Combining their shock troops will be incredible, but they won't deliver a decisive blow just yet.
The French won't mutiny at Verdun as at 1.0- they'll just crumble instead.
Haha- I like that.
This is why I've never found Megali Idea scenarios that plausible- Greece simply doesn't have the manpower to destroy its enemies as the plan calls for.
Diaz will be getting some similar telegrams from Berlin ITTL. There's a reason the CSI holds the quietest sector of the front possible (really, I should have put them on occupation duty in the rear).
Will fix, thank you.
-Diaz won't have the heroic reputation of OTL, but then, Cadorna won't be the bumbling fool who launched eleven offensives at the same mountain range only to collapse after Caporetto. Leadership and discipline in the CSI will be better than in the main Italian forces, however. As I hinted above, Cadorna is about to open a major rift with Falkenhayn which will have knock-on effects for how he is remembered ITTL. It won't do much for Italian standing in German eyes in general.
-I like the idea of Conrad trying his own offensive in the East and possibly colliding head-on with Brusilov!
-France will "survive" 1916 inasmuch as the death blow will have been dealt, but it will take a while for it to kill them. The political fallout and loss of manpower after losing Verdun will push them past the point of recovery.
-Your point about the domestic politics of Brazil/Argentina is very interesting and it applies to the United States as well. For a start, none of these countries are likely to join the war simply because it'll end before Unrestricted Submarine Warfare can push them over the edge (and in the American case, because there will be no Zimmerman Telegram). I know less about the South American states, but in the US, German culture was prevalent enough that people thought dual loyalties might pose an internal threat- how much more so Italian culture? Most of the Italian-Americans in the US at this point were no more than two generations removed from the Mother Country, to say nothing of those who were just born there. You have a very insular culture (for lack of a better term) with its own language and religion, one which is scorned by the White Anglo Saxon Protestants. If Mr. Schmidt in Milwaukee might possibly have disloyal sympathies because his great-grandfather came over during 1848, how will Mr. Romano take being asked to pick up a rifle and kill people born fifty miles away from his ancestral village? If Woodrow Wilson declares war on the Central Powers here, the Democratic Party can kiss the immigrant vote goodbye- and that's without touching Irish-Americans.
Expect Argentina to export a lot more foodstuffs to the Central Powers after the war at British expense.
-I don't forsee a reverse-Caporetto, the French simply won't have the manpower (or the ability to invest in elite unit training) after Verdun.
-I'm not sure who could replace Cadorna here if it ever came to that.
-Aviation will never have a fundamental role in warfare, and these newfangled "machine-guns" ever replace the good old black-power musket!
France will be on her last legs. The only saving grace is that the Germans won't be able to break into the interior after cutting off the Verdun salient.
-The difference with 1.0 is that Petain will pull back before it's too late- this will cost him his career but stave off mutiny... for now. A political disaster but militarily sound.
-I don't forsee a Peruvian Revolution ITTL, though that timeline does sound intriguing.
-"Italy joins the Entente and the war lasts until November 1918? Perish the thought!"