What should the United States, Britain, and France, have done differently regarding Germany, and Europe, at the End of World War One?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 145219
  • Start date
French Order of Battle (approximate)
French Second Army Group
was responsible for manning the bulk of the Maginot Line from Montmédy to south of Strasbourg, and controlled three armies.
87th African Infantry Division
4th Colonial Infantry Division
Third Army
3rd Light Cavalry Division
6th Infantry Division
6th North African Infantry Division
6th Colonial Infantry Division
7th Infantry Division
8th Infantry Division
2nd Infantry Division
56th Infantry Division
26th Infantry Division
42nd Infantry Division
51st Infantry Division
20th Infantry Division
58th Infantry Division
Fourth Army
45th Infantry division
11th Infantry Division
47th Infantry Division
52nd Infantry Division
82nd African Infantry Division
Fifth Army
44th Infantry Division
24th Infantry Division
31st Infantry Division
16th Infantry Division
35th Infantry Division
70th Infantry Division
62nd Infantry Division
103rd Infantry Division
30th Infantry Division
French Third Army Group was responsible for manning the southern end of the Maginot Line, along the River Rhine and controlled one army.
Eighth Army
13th Infantry Division
27th Infantry Division
19th Infantry Division
54th Infantry Division
104th Fortress Division
105th Fortress Division
67th Infantry Division
57th Infantry Division
63rd Infantry Division
600px-Ofensiva_del_Saar2.jpg


German forces
1 Army Wehrkreis XII (France)
NameDate FormedType of UnitLandwehr Name
75.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Fully Trained Reservists
209.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions34.Landwehr-Div.
214.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions11.Landwehr-Div.
223.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions41.Landwehr-Div.
231.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions37.Landwehr-Div.
246.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions26.Landwehr-Div.
79.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Fully Trained Reservists
34.Infanterie-Div01 Apr.1936Active (Peacetime) Divisions
15.Infanterie-Div15 Oct.1935Active (Peacetime) Divisions
52.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Fully Trained Reservists
6.Infanterie-Div15 Oct.1935Active (Peacetime) Divisions
36.Infanterie-Div01 Oct.1936Active (Peacetime) Divisions
9.Infanterie-Div15 Oct.1935Active (Peacetime) Divisions
7 Army Wehrkreis V (France)
NameDate FormedType of UnitLandwehr Name
78.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Fully Trained Reservists
212.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions97.Landwehr-Div.
215.Infanterie-Div26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions45.Landwehr-Div.
14.Landwehr-Div.26 Aug. 1939Reserve and Landwehr Divisions14.Landwehr-Div.
35.Infanterie-Div01 Oct.1936Active (Peacetime) Divisions
5.Infanterie-Div15 Oct.1935Active (Peacetime) Divisions
Wehrkreiskarte.jpg
 
Last edited:
Did the Wallies tell Poland this? Poland was counting on the Wallies to take the German pressure off and overrun Western Germany.
This was the fundamental flaw of the whole 1919 settlement. The French were expecting the East European nations to be a substitute for their former Russian alliance, IOW to give her the support she needed. In fact, however, those states couldn't even preserve themselves w/o *her* support. They were at cross-purposes from day one, hence the events of 1938/9.
 
This was the fundamental flaw of the whole 1919 settlement. The French were expecting the East European nations to be a substitute for their former Russian alliance, IOW to give her the support she needed. In fact, however, those states couldn't even preserve themselves w/o *her* support. They were at cross-purposes from day one, hence the events of 1938/9.
It's rather about the fact that France gradually stopped caring about them and as such lost their trust. Therefore, each of them started pursuing its own policies.
 
It's rather about the fact that France gradually stopped caring about them and as such lost their trust. Therefore, each of them started pursuing its own policies.
Doesn't that follow on from what I said?

If France saw the smaller states as a means to prop *her* up, rather than vice versa, then once she had, in her Maginot Line a defence which (she supposed) was good enough to make them surplus to requirements, then it was natural that she would be l;less concerned about supporting *them*.,
 
Doesn't that follow on from what I said?

If France saw the smaller states as a means to prop *her* up, rather than vice versa, then once she had, in her Maginot Line a defence which (she supposed) was good enough to make them surplus to requirements, then it was natural that she would be l;less concerned about supporting *them*.,
Maginot's point wasn't about being a cure-all impenetrable defense, it was about making a war manageable by channeling the Germans through Belgium or (less likely) Switzerland, in particular the North Swiss plain, where a war of material at 2v1 could be fought.
 
Doesn't that follow on from what I said?

If France saw the smaller states as a means to prop *her* up, rather than vice versa, then once she had, in her Maginot Line a defence which (she supposed) was good enough to make them surplus to requirements, then it was natural that she would be l;less concerned about supporting *them*.,
Don't get me wrong, there were indeed the hostilities between Czechoslovakia and Poland right after ww1, and for that reason France could assume that there's no use of them, and so we got the Treaty of Locarno in 1925. But nevertheless, up to Locarno both Czechoslovakia and Poland trusted the French, and afterwards both Czechoslovakia and Poland had to accustom themselves to the consciousness of the french help not being so certain anymore. Poland chose to capitalize on Hitler's adoration for the polish victory over the Soviets, whereas Czechoslovakia chose to call the Soviets for help, even if that help meant the red army rampaging through other countries to reach its czechoslovak ally in the first place.

I think that the alliance between France and the eastern countries could work, if France had pressured for harsher Versailles. I had mentioned in before, so I'll repeat: if Poland gets more lands at the cost of Germany, then Czechoslovakia won't treat Poland as someone who won't survive "and thus should be replaced by the Soviets". Some persons mentioned in this thread that the harsher Versailles would cause France to lose the support of Britain, but maybe in the long run it would be beneficial. A significant factor in OTL was the fact that France felt safe due to having Britain. If there's no british support for France, then the French will know that they can't afford for any neglections, and thus France would treat supporting its new eastern allies more seriously. This means no Locarno, or at least not limiting it to securing exclusively the west. And so we would have the franco-polish-czechoslovak alliance whose members would trust each other. There would be no Britain of course, but one determined western ally would be more useful than two hesitating ones.
 
@The Link This is a very interesting argument that I never thought about ! Without the ''Grand Entente'' with Britain and expecting US support, France would very probably be much more invested in the ''Little Entente'' (plus Poland) to contain Germany.
 
Don't get me wrong, there were indeed the hostilities between Czechoslovakia and Poland right after ww1, and for that reason France could assume that there's no use of them, and so we got the Treaty of Locarno in 1925. But nevertheless, up to Locarno both Czechoslovakia and Poland trusted the French, and afterwards both Czechoslovakia and Poland had to accustom themselves to the consciousness of the french help not being so certain anymore. Poland chose to capitalize on Hitler's adoration for the polish victory over the Soviets, whereas Czechoslovakia chose to call the Soviets for help, even if that help meant the red army rampaging through other countries to reach its czechoslovak ally in the first place.

I think that the alliance between France and the eastern countries could work, if France had pressured for harsher Versailles. I had mentioned in before, so I'll repeat: if Poland gets more lands at the cost of Germany, then Czechoslovakia won't treat Poland as someone who won't survive "and thus should be replaced by the Soviets". Some persons mentioned in this thread that the harsher Versailles would cause France to lose the support of Britain, but maybe in the long run it would be beneficial. A significant factor in OTL was the fact that France felt safe due to having Britain. If there's no british support for France, then the French will know that they can't afford for any neglections, and thus France would treat supporting its new eastern allies more seriously. This means no Locarno, or at least not limiting it to securing exclusively the west. And so we would have the franco-polish-czechoslovak alliance whose members would trust each other. There would be no Britain of course, but one determined western ally would be more useful than two hesitating ones.
If the Czechs had resisted, the military planned to stage a coup.
 
Last edited:
I would say that we also need Poland to see Czechoslovakia as an ally, not a weak neighbor to be bullied in order to taking Czech land. Something that happened in OTL and surely had some weight in the failure of the Little Entente: why support two idiots who are going to fight each other at the minimum?
 
I would say that we also need Poland to see Czechoslovakia as an ally, not a weak neighbor to be bullied in order to taking Czech land. Something that happened in OTL and surely had some weight in the failure of the Little Entente: why support two idiots who are going to fight each other at the minimum?
Thank Britain for that. And btw, it was Czechoslovakia who bullied Poland first when it was fighting the Soviets, Poles then returned the favor. It could have been solved at the Versailles, likely greatly improving the future relations between those countries, but Britain did all they could to weaken Poland (as that weakened France in turn)
 
Thank Britain for that. And btw, it was Czechoslovakia who bullied Poland first when it was fighting the Soviets, Poles then returned the favor. It could have been solved at the Versailles, likely greatly improving the future relations between those countries, but Britain did all they could to weaken Poland (as that weakened France in turn)
Balance of Power, Lord Palmerston "We (Britain) have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."
 
Top