WI: A different Franco-Prussian War

Shtudmuffin

Ok, so before I start asking questions, let me lay out a scenario for you guys. Anyway, sometime after the Austro-Prussian War, Napoleon III manages to reach an agreement w/ the Italians over the fate of Rome; his troops are pulled out entirely following the agreement. The result is that France and Italy grow closer. When war between France and Prussia looms over the horizon, France, Italy, and Austria-Hungary form an alliance. This triple alliance confronts Prussia and the German states when the F-P war breaks out.

So, my questions are-who wins? What are the immediate effects on Europe? What are the winner's terms? Will any third parties join in the conflict? What other kind of results will we see?
 

Emperor Constantine

Shtudmuffin said:
Ok, so before I start asking questions, let me lay out a scenario for you guys. Anyway, sometime after the Austro-Prussian War, Napoleon III manages to reach an agreement w/ the Italians over the fate of Rome; his troops are pulled out entirely following the agreement. The result is that France and Italy grow closer. When war between France and Prussia looms over the horizon, France, Italy, and Austria-Hungary form an alliance. This triple alliance confronts Prussia and the German states when the F-P war breaks out.

So, my questions are-who wins? What are the immediate effects on Europe? What are the winner's terms? Will any third parties join in the conflict? What other kind of results will we see?
Click to expand...

Well it depends. What are the south German states doing? Are they neutral, siding with Austria or siding with Prussia? if they are Neutral or with Austria it would make a lot harder time for Prussia, fighting a two front war. However if the South German states side with Prussia, If would make a harder time for Austria and could allow the Prussians to send more troops to deal with France instead of wasting troops of Austria. I'm not sure how good the Italian army was in the 1860s-70s but would they send troops to link up with the French army or the Austrian Army?

If the Triple Alliance ( for lack of a better word) wins I can see Austria demanding the dissolution of the North German Confederation, the restoration of the old German Confederation, Restoration of Hanover and other countries and territories annexed after the Austro-Prussian war and even Silesia. For France I can see them asking for part or the whole of the Rhineland or the creation of a new kingdom out of the Rhineland. As for Italy, Prussia doesn't really have anything that Italy wants so why would Italy ally itself with Austria?


Edit: Sorry:eek:. I thought the post was about the Austro-Prussian war, my bad. So i edited my post. Again Sorry.
 
Last edited:

Shtudmuffin

Emperor Constantine said:
Why would Italy ally itself with Austria (it wasn't Austria-Hungary until it lost the Austro-Prussian War) ? Austria still controlled Venetia and Italy definently wanted that. Unless Austria agreed to hand over Venetia to Italy, the best U could hope for is Italy remaining neutral and even then it would want something in exchange, especially if Prussia is promising Italy Venetia. Also why would France from an alliance with Austria? If France's mind Austria would have been a b0gger threat then Prussia.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind, this is all taking place after the Austro-Prussian War (circa 1868). And I am proposing this tripartite alliance between the 3 powers because it was actually proposed IOTL.
 
Nassirisimo

Nassirisimo

Emperor Constantine said:
Why would Italy ally itself with Austria (it wasn't Austria-Hungary until it lost the Austro-Prussian War) ? Austria still controlled Venetia and Italy definently wanted that. Unless Austria agreed to hand over Venetia to Italy, the best U could hope for is Italy remaining neutral and even then it would want something in exchange, especially if Prussia is promising Italy Venetia. Also why would France from an alliance with Austria? If France's mind Austria would have been a b0gger threat then Prussia.
Click to expand...
Italy controlled the majority of Venetia at this time, although Italy still desired Istria and Trento from Austria. This, along with Italy's irredentist claims on France, make me very skeptical as to whether Italy would ally herself with France and Austria. In my opinion, she would be more likely to declare neutrality, throwing herself into the fight as soon as Prussia promised enough (and was doing well enough.

Also, France did not see Austria as a larger threat. In fact, there were many Frenchman (including, arguably, Napoleon III himself) who thought Austria would make a great ally against Prussia. If France put more effort into courting Austria as an ally, it is possible to get both of them to take on Prussia.

The question is, could they win against Prussia? Prussia would have to split her forces, but if she goes against Austria first, the France she would leave in her rear would not be particularly aggressive. The French did launch a limited offensive in the Saar at the beginning of the OTL war, but the lack of offensive spirit among her troops, despite their greatly superior small arms, soon showed. I don't see an Austrian alliance alone changing the mood of France's troops. Unfortunately, I know less about the Austrian Army of the time, so I would have to defer to a more knowledgeable forum member on the subject of their preparedness for war.
 

TickTock The Witch's Dead

Oh boy it's one of these again.

Anyways, if Napoleon could persuade Britain to support him in exchange for Hanover and Helgoland, it might be a substitute for either Italy or Austria.
 

Bee

Germany still wins. It has much better generals, and the lower ranks have better training than those of the alliance.
 

The Ubbergeek

Question; what of possible alliance with dutches or scandinavians? any with grudges against Prussia, and would it change anything?
 

Emperor Constantine

The Ubbergeek said:
Question; what of possible alliance with dutches or scandinavians? any with grudges against Prussia, and would it change anything?
Click to expand...

Thats why I mentioned the south German States. Bavaria, Saxony, Württemberg, and Baden, just to name a few. All southern States that sided with Austria against Prussia and would probably do so again if given the chance. Not to mention Hanover would probably revolt during a war, a revolt supported and funded by it deposed ruler, George V. At the vary least it would distract Prussia for a few weeks and give France more time to mobilize its army.
 

Shtudmuffin

Hörnla said:
The US? Russia? Taka-Tuka-Land? Lampukistan?
Click to expand...

I think by Scandinavia he meant Denmark specifically. Denmark wasn't the happiest camper on the block after losing Schlieswig-Holstein to Prussia, so they might be a likely candidate to join in the fray. However, I personally doubt they would actually join, as they were likely more interested in neutrality by then.
 
PoeFacedKilla

PoeFacedKilla

Banned
why would austria ally with the 2 countries that F**ked them over the most?
i mean sure Prussia won a war against them but the didn't lose much but leadership over germany (which, i think happened in the 1600s.)

On the other hand, italy and france ganged up on ausria and took a good chunk of their northern italian territory.

either way people this is getting old; its like WWII,
unless you replace Nappy III then Prussia wins this war. Their armies are trained to the highest quality in the world and the lower ranks are often smarter in tacticts then those of higher ranking officers in about any other country.

given war, their armies will grow rapidly while staying equally pound-for-pound as powerful.

EDIT** See WWI without England, Russia, the US, no Empire to be threatened. Then tell me how you think this will go.
 

The Ubbergeek

Shtudmuffin said:
I think by Scandinavia he meant Denmark specifically. Denmark wasn't the happiest camper on the block after losing Schlieswig-Holstein to Prussia, so they might be a likely candidate to join in the fray. However, I personally doubt they would actually join, as they were likely more interested in neutrality by then.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was thinking more of them - I should have been a dash more precise and specified 'scandinavian powers'.

PoeFacedKilla, hey, hey - WWII is REALLY WAY MOAR overused, at least.
 

Shtudmuffin

PoeFacedKilla said:
why would austria ally with the 2 countries that F**ked them over the most?
i mean sure Prussia won a war against them but the didn't lose much but leadership over germany (which, i think happened in the 1600s.)

On the other hand, italy and france ganged up on ausria and took a good chunk of their northern italian territory.
Click to expand...

Austria would ally with them to avenge their defeat at Sadowa. Sadowa resulted directly in the loss of the 7 Week's War to Prussia and her allies. While territorial losses were small, Austria lost here sphere of influence over the smaller German states, and the place of Central European hegemon was given to Prussia (Now the North German Confederation) as well. The loss also caused unrest among the Hungarians, which would lead to the creation of the double monarchy in 1867. This only exacerbate the internal fracturing and multiple nationalist movements within the empire when the other nationalities (EG Czechs, Slovaks, Serbs) saw this and began to demand this kind of status.

Furthermore, Austria would ally with France and Italy in this case because the Austrian Premier wanted to IOTL.


given war, their armies will grow rapidly while staying equally pound-for-pound as powerful.
Click to expand...

There's only so many men the Germans can draw from. There is no way they can stand up to the combined manpower and resources of not one, not 2, but 3 major nations on the European continent. Besides, France could certainly be considered close to an equal of Germany if it gets its shit together; and with three times the manpower backing them up, the French may actually have time to do exactly that.
 
Last edited:

Max Sinister

Banned
IOTL, Austria wanted to wait until the French would win a major battle against Prussia - which didn't happen, so Austria did not join the war on France's side.

And Napoleon actually had retreated from Rome already - but some Italians around Garibaldi were too impatient, tried to take Rome in 1867, so the French returned.
 
PoeFacedKilla

PoeFacedKilla

Banned
Shtudmuffin said:
Austria would ally with them to avenge their defeat at Sadowa. Sadowa resulted directly in the loss of the 7 Week's War to Prussia and her allies. While territorial losses were small, Austria lost here sphere of influence over the smaller German states, and the place of Central European hegemon was given to Prussia (Now the North German Confederation) as well. The loss also caused unrest among the Hungarians, which would lead to the creation of the double monarchy in 1867. This only exacerbate the internal fracturing and multiple nationalist movements within the empire when the other nationalities (EG Czechs, Slovaks, Serbs) saw this and began to demand this kind of status.

Furthermore, Austria would ally with France and Italy in this case because the Austrian Premier wanted to IOTL.




There's only so many men the Germans can draw from. There is no way they can stand up to the combined manpower and resources of not one, not 2, but 3 major nations on the European continent. Besides, France could certainly be considered close to an equal of Germany if it gets its shit together; and with three times the manpower backing them up, the French may actually have time to do exactly that.
Click to expand...

i think we've seen how good of allies austria and italy can be.
and like i said, france can't win with nappy III; hes an idiot
 

LordKalvan

Everyone is forgetting Russia and Bismarck. Russia signed in 1867 a secret treaty with Prussia pledging to intervene if Austria allied with France. Given the lack of love Russia has had for Austria since the Crimea, I'd believe they would not be shy to intervene.
Bismarck had already tied in the southern German states with Prussia at the end of the 1866 war, and had shown alot of restraint in the peace treaties: it is doubtful that they would renege on their promises.
Remember also that the war will be declared by france (no way the wily Otto gets stuck with the war guilt), since Nappy needs a"short victorious war" to prop up a tottering regime.
Denmark is not going to intervene after the S-H war, and Grat Britain is not going to be entangled in a continental war anyway.

Finally, Austria (which had been diplomatically dabbling with France since the early 1860s) would not intervene, unless Italy were locked in an alliance pact with France. However an alliance with Austria (the traditional enemy) and France (which had pissed away all the good will of 1859 with their handling of the Roman question) was politically too awkward to be ratified (although the king was supporting it).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top