The Ottoman Empire in a Central Powers victorious world
- Thread starter The Federalist
- Start date
They take all of central asia and north africa. then they poised to dominate the world. 
Keenir
Banned
They take all of central asia and north africa. then they poised to dominate the world.
nah. the paperwork would do them in.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
I'm not sure - that's one area I haven't researched yet, although I have a backlog of books on that very subject. My initial impression is that they would occupy Persian Azerbaijan but leave the rest of it alone. The Ottomans tended to be a little legalistic in their approach to territorial title out of long habit (their only recourse to Western imperialism), and I can't think of any place they ever moved after 1683 that they didn't have some feeling of title to for fear of setting precedents. I think it's very unlikely that they would push into the Southern core regions of Persia.
I'm rather interested in how the Greeks could pull off an amphibious invasion of Anatolia, you know, since BULGARIA is in the way from the land route
Keenir
Banned
weeeeeeeeeee!
yay!!!
*celebrates*
---
wait....unless "get" = "understand, kenn, grok," then *stops cold and retreats*
Last edited:
Hello Folks,
I havent been writing or reading in this forum for a while, but this subject is just too interesting!!
Why dear friend? I would think that the Oil in the Empire would be enough for a while, especially if you put the Oil from Baku and Ploesti into the equation. One other point of consideration is that the world economy, at that point (I believe), was still a coal and steel economy. WWII with its motorization, the Volkswagen, Nylon and other Oil derivatives had still not entered the consumption cycle of the masses.
Thats a tough one, considering the uneasyness of the Ottomans attacking the Persians and Vice Versa. Past experiences in the 16th,17th,and 18th century have shown that a war between both sides ended in costly stalemates. One major reason was the hostile terrain the war had to be fought on and over! The terrain problem is still not solved, to date armies have a hard time moving efficiently over the terrain!!
I havent been writing or reading in this forum for a while, but this subject is just too interesting!!
Why dear friend? I would think that the Oil in the Empire would be enough for a while, especially if you put the Oil from Baku and Ploesti into the equation. One other point of consideration is that the world economy, at that point (I believe), was still a coal and steel economy. WWII with its motorization, the Volkswagen, Nylon and other Oil derivatives had still not entered the consumption cycle of the masses.
Thats a tough one, considering the uneasyness of the Ottomans attacking the Persians and Vice Versa. Past experiences in the 16th,17th,and 18th century have shown that a war between both sides ended in costly stalemates. One major reason was the hostile terrain the war had to be fought on and over! The terrain problem is still not solved, to date armies have a hard time moving efficiently over the terrain!!
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
My feeling about this is that the Russian collapse would leave a vacuum in Persian Azerbaijan and as the Ottomans had troops in the theatre, there is nothing to stop them. There were many Persian Azeri commanders that worked with the Ottomans - also, this is one area where control did pass back and forth for some time.
True, True,
but my problem is the motivation behind such an attack. I would have thought that the Ottomans would be rather busy reforming and strengthening their lands. I would imagine that there would have to be some cleaning up to do in the empire (Arabia for example?). Establishing a new power base in Egypt would be in order, perhaps?
I'd still like to know what happens when Atatruk or Enver takes over?
And when the time comes for the ATL World War 2, when the defeated Allies seek revenge, would the Ottomans switch sides?
And when the time comes for the ATL World War 2, when the defeated Allies seek revenge, would the Ottomans switch sides?
Last edited:
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
The motivation would be the collapse of Russia and dreams of pan-Turkish expansion into Central Asia. I don't think the Ottomans would attack Persia so much as just fill the vacuum left by them - as Persian power in Persian zerbaijan was extremely weak at this time and it had been occupied by Russia, it is really just a matter of walking in and staying there.
While the Ottomans should be consolidating their position in their pre-1914 lands, Enver in particular was never one to resist overextending. That's why a secondary power like the empire ended up fighting on seven fronts.
With the war over, I doubt that the CUP junta will be able to maintain it's grip on the government, but that would depend upon external pressures. Past a peace treaty, I doubt there would be any adventurism, although the temptation to interfere in Central Asia would probably be very tempting, especially if Baku is held.
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
Enver is already in charge, and with an Ottoman victory, there will be no Ataturk. It was a very specific set of circumstances that led to his rise.
So who you think would come to power after the CUP?
The Sultan?
Some sort of democracy?
I see things being quite bad for the Ottoman Empire actually, as they are for all of Germany's allies.
If this is a late win the Ottomans are going to be highly financially dependent on Germany to maintain their position outside the Anatolian heartlands, and presumably this will worsen as they are dragged into whatever economic system the Germans impose on Europe, extra territory will do nothing to solve that weakness.
Like Austria-Hungary you have to ask what the Ottomans ever really got out of the German alliance, other than protection from Russia of course.
If this is a late win the Ottomans are going to be highly financially dependent on Germany to maintain their position outside the Anatolian heartlands, and presumably this will worsen as they are dragged into whatever economic system the Germans impose on Europe, extra territory will do nothing to solve that weakness.
Like Austria-Hungary you have to ask what the Ottomans ever really got out of the German alliance, other than protection from Russia of course.
Yeah, but what if Ataturk chooses to enter politics after his military career?
What could be his ATL political motive/agenda? Would he still want to introduce thise reforms of his?
A good motivation for this would be if Germany degrades the Empire and refuses to share the glory and spoils of the victory, like the way the Western Allies treated Japan after WW1, something like the Germans establishing complete control over Eygpt, even if that country rightfully belongs to the Ottoman sphere of influence.
Dr Pervez Hoodbhoy
Banned
7 fronts? The Caucasus, Gallipoli, Mesopotamia, Palestine, the Hejaz, Iran, these are the ones I know of. What's the 7th? Did they assist the Bulgarians against Romania?
Abdul Hadi Pasha
Banned
They were also engaged on the Salonika front, in Galicia, and against Romania - seven of their best divisions. The two sent to Galicia were elites of Gallipoli and fully equipped - Falkenhayn referred to them as "unusually useful", and they had to bear the brunt of Russian offensives as the Russians hoped their junctures in the lines would be weak points.