UK/US Territorial Losses/Monetary payment in WWI loss?

Presuming a Central Powers victory *after* the USA joins the war. (Paris falls, the French surrender, etc), would the Germans be in a condition to get anything other than peace from the UK/US?

With US Support, it appears that the UK can survive indefinitely in terms of food imports, so I'm not sure what the Germans can do to force anything...
 

longsword14

Banned
Presuming a Central Powers victory *after* the USA joins the war. (Paris falls, the French surrender, etc), would the Germans be in a condition to get anything other than peace from the UK/US?

With US Support, it appears that the UK can survive indefinitely in terms of food imports, so I'm not sure what the Germans can do to force anything...
If the Germans manage a decisive break, then the war in the theater is already over, there is not much that can be done.
 
With the use of French and Belgian ships and manpower, Germany would possibly be able to pose a threat to Britain. As a major player, Germany may entice the Dutch to join an alliance in order to defeat Britain (UK/Netherlands have been bitter naval rivals for a long time - the Netherlands may be very pleased to get one up on Britain). Germany might simply invade the Netherlands - they are not on the best of terms as neighbours - and use their ships and manpower anyway.
On the other hand, if Germany took French overseas territory, they may not need the British Empire, so might simply kick British and American troops out of Europe - French suffering may be repayment enough.
Third scenario - the Netherlands join the Allies and British/American forces launch a new offensive from the west. This becomes a much faster moving war outside the trenches. Either Amsterdam or Berlin would be captured within a couple of years.
 
From a defensive and territorial perspective, Germany would need to invade the Netherlands. With a combined German, French and Dutch fleet, they could challenge British shipping. By limiting which ports British and American ships could trade in, Germany could severely hamper their international trade. With combined German, French and Dutch colonies, they could rival the British Empire.
Germany also demand short-term reparations be paid in the form of ships.
For long-term reparations, Germany could demand the most lucrative American and British colonies. Yes, I know that the USA did not officially have "colonies," but she did have a bunch of "protectorates" in the former Spanish Empire.
 
If France and Russia are willing to surrender on just about any terms the Germans would dictate, the Germans should and most probably would let the British/UK off without any territorial losses or payments and might even be willing to concede losses already lost in Africa and the Pacific.

After all what is Togo worth compared to Briery or Lithuania.

Britain is going to be most concerned about German Naval/submarine bases all over the world in a future war. If Britain can make peace without worrying about that they would be willing to concede German gains in the continent.

British/Japanese/USA sea power is still preeminent and can continue to impose a blockade on Germany. German war plans were to complete a war quickly before the economic impact began to hurt. Britian still has considerable leverage and most of the losses will be on France and Russia.
 

longsword14

Banned
If France and Russia are willing to surrender on just about any terms the Germans would dictate, the Germans should and most probably would let the British/UK off without any territorial losses or payments and might even be willing to concede losses already lost in Africa and the Pacific.

After all what is Togo worth compared to Briery or Lithuania.

Britain is going to be most concerned about German Naval/submarine bases all over the world in a future war. If Britain can make peace without worrying about that they would be willing to concede German gains in the continent.

British/Japanese/USA sea power is still preeminent and can continue to impose a blockade on Germany. German war plans were to complete a war quickly before the economic impact began to hurt. Britian still has considerable leverage and most of the losses will be on France and Russia.
A blockade is useless if there is no support on the ground. Germany did not want to land in Dover and blast their way to London, if the war is won on land, Germany has won. The naval part is a side-show.
 
A blockade is useless if there is no support on the ground. Germany did not want to land in Dover and blast their way to London, if the war is won on land, Germany has won. The naval part is a side-show.

Agree. Lots of holes in a blockade, although it still effects German business interests. I just don't see how Germany can force Britain to pay a bunch of reparations (or even give back captured colonies) if she doesn't want to. Britain just says no. Germany can wage commerce war with better bases than OTL, but Britain has no need to maintain a field army in France or support France/Italy so I can see this going on for a long time. It makes more financial sense for the Germans to just make an easy peace with Britain.
 
Firstly a French surrender would mean no host country for the BEF and AEF, they would have to occupy France to maintain their forces in the field or leave France. Secondly French surrender means Germany occupies the Channel ports so the uboat campaign immediately reached WW2 happy time levels of effectiveness for a while, the likes of the Paris Gun and Langer Max begin bombarding England and surface warships can be moved into the Channel. It is this mortal threat to Britain that will mean Germany will get major concessions from Britain rather than having to settle for what Britain deigns to give Germany.

Stated German war aims are as varied and as fickle as the German political system and will change as the power changes, once the war ends the Military annexationists will lose ground and their demands will be watered down by politicians within months or a couple of years. The main German war aim was MittelEuopa accepted by the world colonial powers, if this also includes Belgium and the annexation of Briey that's awesome but if they have to be traded away that is something the politicians were prepared to negotiate after demobilisation. In Africa they wanted Nigeria if Britain was defeated, but Africa was a secondary war aim, so I would expect it to come into play as a bargaining piece for primary aims: perhaps don't include Belgium in MittelEuropa in exchange for Nigeria. But most importantly Germany had major non-territorial war aims that people don't think about when discussing this sort of thing, they get bogged down on an ore field that is worth a fraction of what a comprehensive trade treaty with Britain is worth.
 
There is no way to force Britain to do anything unless you have German Soldier marching down whitehall dictating terms - ditto Pennsylvania Avenue NW to force the US to do likewise!

Germany was never going to win at sea in WW1 so they are never going to be marching troops down Whitehall (or sight-seeing in Washington).

The best I think the CP could hope for from both Britain and the USA is a return of the German Colonies and Peace.

The French Fleet even had it been handed over in its entirety is not going to tip the balance not when you combine 3 of the 4 most powerful fleets in the world and having french ports simply adds to the number of ports that gets mined/blockaded.

Britain and the US can stand up littoral Naval forces a damn sight faster than Germany could

Germany is the one starving in 1918 not Britain or the US its in Germany's interest to end the war ASAP and normalise relations with Britain and the US ASAP and restart trading.

No Germany take the peace and keeps its gains in Europe.
 
The same applies in reverse; Britain and the USA cannot defeat Germany, they can't even stop them basing uboats in Cherbourg or shelling Kent. So if Britain is going to play hardball then she gets a peace with Germany annexing Belgium and northern France down to the Somme. Yep, that's exactly what Britain went to war for, to get Germany within gun range, sounds like a great deal.
 

longsword14

Banned
Agree. Lots of holes in a blockade, although it still effects German business interests. I just don't see how Germany can force Britain to pay a bunch of reparations (or even give back captured colonies) if she doesn't want to. Britain just says no. Germany can wage commerce war with better bases than OTL, but Britain has no need to maintain a field army in France or support France/Italy so I can see this going on for a long time. It makes more financial sense for the Germans to just make an easy peace with Britain.
They just might. As a poster above said, the problem for German naval bases had been drastically reduced, now they have access to the channel and will base their U- Boats much closer to Britain. Britain and Germany come to a peace of some sorts, but there is nothing really that it can do to Berlin now that could make them change their decision.
 
Yeah I'm sorry everyone who thinks the Dutch fleet will allow Germany to invade Britain are fucking dreaming... Germany wins on the continent, they probably lose all none euro possessions.
 
Why would Germany invade Britain? Germany holds territory of direct threat to Britain long term and an array of options on how to deal with it. I think it is ludicrous to think Britain will be happy with major annexations in northern France and a German navy base at Boulogne just as long as they keep the kalahari desert!
 
Germany would have to be careful with what they demand from Britain as, although there would be little reason for a great fascist rise in Germany, Britain could be moved in that direction. Sir Oswald Mosley could come to power and lead a fascist Britain to war in Europe. On the other hand, with a slightly weeaker position than the Allies would have had in 1919, Germany might not be able to put in place such crushing demands. The Second World War might never have happened. Any thoughts?
 
Top