Too late

WI in the Great War the British send troops too late into France too late to push the Germans back at the Battle of Marne? If France surrendered once Paris was taken what situation is the UK in? Eastern front remains the same situation with the Russians attempting constant offensives.
 
WI in the Great War the British send troops too late into France too late to push the Germans back at the Battle of Marne? If France surrendered once Paris was taken what situation is the UK in? Eastern front remains the same situation with the Russians attempting constant offensives.

I'm not sure Paris could be taken. Conquering it street by street would surely require more manpower than the German army could spare from the rest of the front.

What you might get (istr a big thread about this) is a Western Front much deeper inside France than OTL's, and running right through the suburbs of the capital. I hate to think what Paris would look like after a few years of that. Probably a bigger version of Ypres.
 
I'm not sure Paris could be taken. Conquering it street by street would surely require more manpower than the German army could spare from the rest of the front.

What you might get (istr a big thread about this) is a Western Front much deeper inside France than OTL's, and running right through the suburbs of the capital. I hate to think what Paris would look like after a few years of that. Probably a bigger version of Ypres.

You don't have to shell Paris. Either flank it and cut it off or get within artillery range and shell it to death
 
I'm not sure Paris could be taken. Conquering it street by street would surely require more manpower than the German army could spare from the rest of the front.

...

It was surrounded by a network of old forts and new entrenchements the Territorials had been digging in the preceeding week. Unless the French fail to occupy and defend that it would have been a tough battle.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
WI in the Great War the British send troops too late into France too late to push the Germans back at the Battle of Marne? If France surrendered once Paris was taken what situation is the UK in? Eastern front remains the same situation with the Russians attempting constant offensives.
For that to happen you would have to delay the british troops arriving for (more ?) than a months at least.
(OTL embarking of BEF from 9.August). Von Klucks 1st Army "met" them already at 21. - 23. August at the belgian-french border (battle of Mons).

Without them 1.Army might have pushed near the banks of the Seine north of Paris around 5.September, together with some more luck for 2. and 3.Army to crush the french 5.Army between them. Still at that moment british troops comming in to defend Paris and counter-attack from there against 1.Army north or 2.Army west of Paris would have brought the germans in some deep sh--, ... problems very similar to what happend at the 1. battle of the Marne.
 
It was surrounded by a network of old forts and new entrenchements the Territorials had been digging in the preceeding week. Unless the French fail to occupy and defend that it would have been a tough battle.
How about starving it into submission a la Leningrad in WW2. OK so Leningrad did not fall but better that than Stalingrad. Besides it is a first class sink for French resources. It means that Germany can take other parts of France and so win the Great War that way.
 

NoMommsen

Donor
Besides it is a first class sink for French resources.
Other way round is much more realistic.

With some troops, territorials and a properly propagandistic motivated populace fighting for 'their city' it would be a hell of a resource sink for the germans.
... for troops heavily needed on a northern Seine-front, where the - finally - arrived and fresh Brits would attack.

In that situation IMO holding on the large area of Paris, defended fiercly by 'militia' + troops, partially strongly fortified would be the best the Entente could do.
It would give them the opportunity to attack the now dangerous thinnly spread german forces in strengh where ever they want.
 
Id hate to see Versailles in the aftermath of that war. Lets face it France would be seen as the victim for decades while Germany as barbarians if they shell the city.
 
Capturing Paris street-by-street is doing it the hard way. Far easier to surround the city and starve or shell it into surrendering.

Surround and starve is a classic seige tradition going back thousands of years.
Encircling the city is more of a blitzkrieg tactic.
Both tactics avoid lengthy, bloody fights for each city block.

As an aside: the difference between Leningrad and Stalingrad was that Germans 90 percent encircled Leningrad. The only remaining access was via an ice road across a lake.
OTOH German tactics failed miserably at Stalingrad because Germans only held the West Bank of the river. German soldiers never encircled Stalingrad, leaving Russians a half-dozen places to cross the river and re-supply defenders. Germans tried to capture factories on the West Bank while allowing Russians to re-supply across the river.

Far less expensive to encircle and starve a city.
 
Top