United states of Danubia

Deleted member 1487

theres a difference. While vienna had some czechs, german was still dominating it, also most czechs in vienna leatrned german or knew a bit german when they came.
While in Sudetenland, was almost completly inhabitated by germans and dominated by germans.
lower styria had slovene population, and thus should be given to carniola same with german speaking parts of bohemia, they should be given to Sudetenland/German Austria.

The Czechs would and did repeatedly riot over the mere suggestion of dividing historical Bohemia and Moravia into Czech and German areas. The Czechs wanted dominion over the whole of the territories in question and the Germans living there, to make them learn Czech and become culturally Czech, just as they had been forced to learn German and become culturally German for centuries. The Germans of course refused to tolerate this. Violence ensued and was getting worse as WW1 approached.
 
also what would the czechs prefer, being still under austrian rule, or being autonomous and equally treated but giving up german speaking regions ? The Austrians still have more to say than czechs in Cisleithania, and if the Austrians offer the czechs the autonomy they always wanted, but therefore want the german speaking areas to be seperated, why would they say no if they had the chance ?
 
Last edited:
Quick question If AH and Serbia/Montenegro were at war and no one else. Would AH offer Bulgaria all of Macedonia for their entry on the side of AH if the first few battles went in favour of Serbia?
 

Deleted member 1487

also what would the czechs prefer, being still under austrian rule, or being autonomous and equally treated but giving up german speaking regions ? The Austrians still have more to say than czechs in Cisleithania, and if the Austrians offer the czechs the autonomy they always wanted, but therefore want the german speaking areas to be seperated, why would they say no if they had the chance ?

They want all of the above. And they are willing to hold out for it. That was the level of extremism at the time, as no one was really willing to compromise. Plus in the long run birthrates favored the Czechs.


Quick question If AH and Serbia/Montenegro were at war and no one else. Would AH offer Bulgaria all of Macedonia for their entry on the side of AH if the first few battles went in favour of Serbia?
AH wouldn't lose in that situation. OTL they only lost the initial battles because they were outnumbered by the Serbs due to mismanagement of forces by Conrad von Hötzendorff. The main strike group, the 2nd army, was pulled away before it could intervene in the invasion and ultimately only left 2 corps behind that were not able to coordinate with the other, remaining forces.
Had the 2nd army with its 6 corps and cavalry division been present, as was in the original plan, advancing down the Morava river valley, Serbia could not stop them and would lose badly. The 5th and 6th armies were supposed to be simply the follow on/exploitation forces, not the main battle force. IOTL these forces that were not equipped, nor prepared to fight a main battle against the Serbian army were left in the lurch after they had started their invasion of West Serbia and the main invasion force pulled out at the last second.
With that main force, the 2nd army, supported by all of the major heavy artillery batteries in the AH combined army would cross the Danube and run riot throughout the economic heart of Serbia. There would be no need to include anyone else in the invasion, as the AHs would be too powerful for the Serbs to deal with.

Edit:
Check out my TL Conrad Waits to get an OOB of what I'm talking about.
The Serb armies were little more than reinforced Corps and the Serb artillery stocks were badly depleted after the second Balkan war just a year before. Yes, the Serbs had most of their military capable men mobilized and experienced, veteran infantry, which is why they did so well IOTL against an outnumbered and unprepared AH force. Against a much larger and far better supplied and supported (with heavy weapons) enemy attacking Belgrade and fighting on the level ground of the Morava valley would overwhelm the Serbs, who could not hold up to the heavy artillery of the AHs, nor their, to the Serbs, unlimited supply of munitions.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Okay thanks

Is either of these a possibility

1)Bulgaria invades just as serbia collapses

2)Bulgaria asks for Macedonia from AH after the war
A)AH refuses (I can't see this happening)
B)AH accepts
 

Deleted member 1487

Okay thanks

Is either of these a possibility

1)Bulgaria invades just as serbia collapses

2)Bulgaria asks for Macedonia from AH after the war
A)AH refuses (I can't see this happening)
B)AH accepts

Nope. Mobilization would be costly for Bulgaria and OTL they only did it when their costs were paid for by Germany. Also this is right during the harvest and Bulgaria is an agricultural country; historically they had problems when mobilizing their army, as that meant their farm workers were not available in the economy. It is a primary reason Bulgaria fell apart in 1918. Also it would take at least 2 weeks to mobilize their army, probably more, by which time Serbia would have been beaten and AH following up on their victory. Bulgaria would have to mobilize at the start of the war to get in on the war before its too late.
 
Nope. Mobilization would be costly for Bulgaria and OTL they only did it when their costs were paid for by Germany. Also this is right during the harvest and Bulgaria is an agricultural country; historically they had problems when mobilizing their army, as that meant their farm workers were not available in the economy. It is a primary reason Bulgaria fell apart in 1918. Also it would take at least 2 weeks to mobilize their army, probably more, by which time Serbia would have been beaten and AH following up on their victory. Bulgaria would have to mobilize at the start of the war to get in on the war before its too late.

Okay so the second option then?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
theres a difference. While vienna had some czechs, german was still dominating it, also most czechs in vienna leatrned german or knew a bit german when they came.
While in Sudetenland, was almost completly inhabitated by germans and dominated by germans.
lower styria had slovene population, and thus should be given to carniola same with german speaking parts of bohemia, they should be given to Sudetenland/German Austria.
The problems here are: The Czechs won't accept that Sudetenland is not a part of Bohemia- Moravia. In their view it would be theft of Czech lands by the Germans. And there was a considerable German minority in the parts of Bohemia that had Czech majority. Leaving them to be governed by Prague would be the same a betraying all German people...

Also the Austrian Germans won't allow Carniola. And the Habsburgs would probably back them in that. Carniola was a part of the old ancestral lands, and shouldn't be split from main Austria.
 
The problems here are: The Czechs won't accept that Sudetenland is not a part of Bohemia- Moravia. In their view it would be theft of Czech lands by the Germans. And there was a considerable German minority in the parts of Bohemia that had Czech majority. Leaving them to be governed by Prague would be the same a betraying all German people...

Also the Austrian Germans won't allow Carniola. And the Habsburgs would probably back them in that. Carniola was a part of the old ancestral lands, and shouldn't be split from main Austria.
Eliminating the Slovenes as a factor would make a greater Austria far simpler, though they had tended to be one of the more peaceful groups so a certain degree of autonomy should be tolerated, especially if it could be used to swallow up the areas with Italian majorities. Anyone think and a decent thread could be made from trying to keep Austria proper as large as possible?
 

yourworstnightmare

Banned
Donor
Eliminating the Slovenes as a factor would make a greater Austria far simpler, though they had tended to be one of the more peaceful groups so a certain degree of autonomy should be tolerated, especially if it could be used to swallow up the areas with Italian majorities. Anyone think and a decent thread could be made from trying to keep Austria proper as large as possible?
Well if they gave the Italians autonomy, they'd join Italy the next day, so it would be a bad idea anyways.
 
I think you all view it too critical, also the austro-italians prefered staying in Austria, not italy.
 
Last edited:
no, read this on the german wikipedia:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96sterreich-Ungarns_Armee_im_Ersten_Weltkrieg

"Die von Italien erhofften und etwa von Gabriele D'Annunzio immer wieder propagierten Massendesertationen italienischsprachiger k.u.k. Soldaten blieben aus. Die Mehrheit der einfachen Bevölkerung des Trentino und des Küstenlandes, der sogenannten irridenti - (der Unerlösten), die auch die Soldaten stellen mussten (etwa die Hälfte der Kaiserjäger bestand aus Trientinern), wollte nicht zu Italien gehören, sondern lieber bei Österreich bleiben. Das machte sich auch in der Kampfmoral dieser Soldaten bemerkbar, was dazu führte, dass 1916 unter den italienischen Infanteristen ein Sprichwort kursierte Dio ci liberi degli irredenti! („Gott befreie uns von den Unerlösten!“)."




the italians hoped that the austro italians would change the sides and fight for italy, but this failed. the majority of the austro italian soldiers, prefered Austria over italy and rather wanted to be in Austria. The italians called them irredenti, the fightning morale was good, because they wanted to fight for Austria. The italians had a saying: Dio ci liberi degli irredenti! (god please release us from the irridenti.
 
The Venetians weren't too fond of being annexed by the Savoyards, certainly. Even today some of them want to be lumped together with the Friulian and Tyrolese in one big automous region.
 
The problems here are: The Czechs won't accept that Sudetenland is not a part of Bohemia- Moravia.
According to my [admittedly brief] research on this subject, during the 1880s which was the period when I suggested the change could occur, the term 'Sudetenland' certainly wasn't yet in widespread use and might actually not yet have been invented.
And if you don't follow traditional provincial boundaries then what other minimum size for a to-be-separated area has a more logical basis? Counties? Cities? Towns? Villages? Streets? What makes any of those levels a more 'legitimate' one at which to stop dividing?
 
The Venetians weren't too fond of being annexed by the Savoyards, certainly. Even today some of them want to be lumped together with the Friulian and Tyrolese in one big automous region.

Yes but they were even less fond to be with Hasburg, and the autonous fringe is a fringe of a fringe
 

Deleted member 1487

no, read this on the german wikipedia:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Österreich-Ungarns_Armee_im_Ersten_Weltkrieg

"Die von Italien erhofften und etwa von Gabriele D'Annunzio immer wieder propagierten Massendesertationen italienischsprachiger k.u.k. Soldaten blieben aus. Die Mehrheit der einfachen Bevölkerung des Trentino und des Küstenlandes, der sogenannten irridenti - (der Unerlösten), die auch die Soldaten stellen mussten (etwa die Hälfte der Kaiserjäger bestand aus Trientinern), wollte nicht zu Italien gehören, sondern lieber bei Österreich bleiben. Das machte sich auch in der Kampfmoral dieser Soldaten bemerkbar, was dazu führte, dass 1916 unter den italienischen Infanteristen ein Sprichwort kursierte Dio ci liberi degli irredenti! („Gott befreie uns von den Unerlösten!“)."




the italians hoped that the austro italians would change the sides and fight for italy, but this failed. the majority of the austro italian soldiers, prefered Austria over italy and rather wanted to be in Austria. The italians called them irredenti, the fightning morale was good, because they wanted to fight for Austria. The italians had a saying: Dio ci liberi degli irredenti! (god please release us from the irridenti.
The Italian Austrians were not trusted to fight against Italy, so were sent to the Eastern Front. There were definitely some Austro-Italians that helped Italy during the war though. But the Italians that were 'liberated' by Italy were pretty poorly treated by Italy for a while, especially during the war. The 'native' Italians treated the austro-Italians as Austrians.
From what I gathered though the Austro-Italian soldiers did have low morale, especially as the war went on and they did desert in higher than average numbers on whatever front they were on.
 
Top