WI: Central Powers Victory Or Stalemate In 1918?

I actually had a argument over this,here's the possibility. World War I becomes a stalemate,because the United States comes to the defense of Germany,Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire. The British tried to convince America to be on their side,and they did..but barely.

This idea that America comes to be an ally of Germany,comes from the fact that around 1918 and shortly before..there's a huge influx of German immigrants in America,and the Irish-Americans want to use this as an excuse for Ireland's independence.

The German Empire survives,but at the cost of loosing all of it's colonial possessions to Britain. But at the same time,there are some mixed feelings about all of it..

Russia suffers staggering losses at the front,and Czar Nicholas II avoids the February Revolution by actually being there instead of else ware. Lenin is executed instead of being exiled to Siberia,the only consequence is that Russia becomes a Constitutional monarchy after the war,a congress (Duma) runs things..but with the Czar's approval..because before,and even during the war..the Russian people still respected their ruler.

The worst off being the Ottoman Empire,which is barely being held together. Aid soon comes in from the victorious Germany and United States,along with the morale boost that came from winning the war. One huge point of argument is that possibly with the Ottomans still in control,the Middle East does not descend into chaos..like it naturally did in real life.

What do others think would have happened if the Central Powers,with America won the war..or caused stalemate?
 
You'd need the Germans to arrive way earlier. It doesn't matter in 1918; in OTL the U.S. declared war in 1917.
 
The problem with this TL is that the U.S. was giving major military aid to the Entente powers long before they entered the war proper, rather like lend-lease in WWII. They'd already picked a side before 1917.

I'm not entirely sure of the reasons, I think there may have been an embargo on the Reich by the UK before the war, but I'm not sure.

At any rate, it's definitely an intriguing idea, as the U.S. and Germany are the two biggest industrial powers respectively in the world at this time. I think it needs an earlier PoD, however.
 
I do not no much about this time period and this idea could be completely ASB. What if American companies tried to ignore the blockade and sell supplies to both sides, only to become very annoyed when the entente seizes their shipping. Then the entente accidently blows up an american ship, thinking it an enemy or smuggler. Anti entente mania ensues U.S. joins CP. Again I know very little about this subjects and this could be about as likely as Days of Infamy and the end of the beginning
 
i think the only way this could happen would be if the germans skipped the 1918 offensive... after knocking out russia they could have stayed on the defensive and keep their storm troops in reserve
france and britain where nearly bled dry at this point
if they sit tight in the hindenburg line they could hold out for a pro rata stalemate
 
It might work if there is a political backlash against the British as a result of the Easter Rebellion of 1916 and a violent British reaction against the Irish. The result would have been that the Irish-American population would have been heavily anti-British and very politically active. Combined with the German-American population it might have altered tha political situtation enough to either block all sales to the allies and keep the US out of the war or see the US join with the Central Powerws over the issue of Irish Independence.
 
the media can also do a better job pointing out the lusitania situation too.... she was carring hundreds of crates of rifle cartrides and some canadian troops
this could piss off enough german americans and irish americans to at least keep the us neurtral
also the situation in mexico can escalate and become open war keeping usa busy and letting the germans crush the brits and french unchecked
 
wow, USN + HSF vs RN ... I want front row seats for that one ... or, considering the amount of ordnance that would be flung about ... make that back row seats.

Actually, with the US joining the CP in 1918, they won't get really going until 1919, which means that, the Spanish flu will be killing people on both side by the hundreds daily (if not thousands)

I could definitly see this devolving into stalemate far more nasty then OTL.
To many dead to bury, mutinies, mass desertion ...
Maybe even civil unrest in the US ("what did we get ourselves into?!?!")
 
Armistice of Exhaustion

I wrote a timeline a few years back in which the Spring Offensive of 1918 was a success because Ludendorff stuck completely to the new tactics in play. As the French army collapses into desertion, the Entente grudgingly signs an Armistice on July 28th (4th anniversary of the war). The Entente retains control of the Colonial, Pacific, and Ottoman Theaters; The Central Powers retain control of the Eastern Theaters from Finland to Crimea and Kavalla.

Basically, the Germans annex Luxembourg but due to American threats do not annex anything else in western Europe. Germany also loses all of its colonial territories and the Ottomans lose basically everything south of Anatolia since the entente occupies all that land and there is little that can be done about it.

On the other hand, the Central Powers completely annex Serbia and set up all the countries they care to following the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, which is recognized by the entente.

Among the various possible post-war developments I fear that the Armenian Genocide could end much worse than OTL, with around 1,500,000 massacred.
 
I do not no much about this time period and this idea could be completely ASB. What if American companies tried to ignore the blockade and sell supplies to both sides, only to become very annoyed when the entente seizes their shipping. Then the entente accidently blows up an american ship, thinking it an enemy or smuggler. Anti entente mania ensues U.S. joins CP. Again I know very little about this subjects and this could be about as likely as Days of Infamy and the end of the beginning
Maybe the High seas fleet has some relativly early success in contesting the blockade on the surface. Possibly up to the point of trapping elements of the Royal navy successfully, and bleeding some of their strength. Not enough to allow more than a trickle of supplies in for a time, but it hurts the british, and causes the Royal Navy to redouble its blockading efforts. So some american flagged vessels attempting to reach germany are boarded or otherwise challenged by british warships... This could definitly sour relationships, although something else (probably a different president from 1916 on for starters, although butterflies can handle that) will be needed for America to join a shooting war for the central powers.
 
So,in order for things to have been possibly different..America would have needed to know more things from the German point of view..as well as anti-British sentiment. I've spoken to some of the Germans I know,and their grandparents and great grandparents told them,and they told me that sympathy toward Germany was high before the war.

One other thing I did not put in my original post,was the mixed feeling. I've been told,and read that Germany was "sticked" with the bill. Having to pay for the costs of the war,and blame..when it really wasn't their fault. Another thing was that the Germans were in the process of arranging to end the war without Germany being defeated,the stalemate..like I first said..but the Allies forced a "victory" and the plan fell through...
 
after the brest litovsk treaty the germans could announce they accept the fourteen points save all the 1918 fighting period... france at this point has only slightly regained their balance from the mutinys and britain had shot its bolt at 3rd ypres. they might have accepted the germans where willing to retun to the prewar western front borders
ludendorff and hindenburg thought they could win
 

Redbeard

Banned
It will not be difficult to find PoDs to have the Central Powers victorious or at least a stalemate by 1918, the tough job is having this happen as a consequence of USA siding with the Central Powers.
Both Germany and the Entente will need some major PoDs in their behavior – no unrestricted u-boat warfare, no Zimmermann telegram, no negative spin over raped Belgian nuns etc.
The British need to be very zealous in their execution of “rule the waves” – like a lot of incidents of boarded/sunk American ships. Perhaps some bloody incidents at the US-Canadian border and of course a civil war in Ireland involving a lot more of negative spin for the British.
Not likely, but not entirely impossible. But still, USA by early 20th century predominantly was a ”British derivative” – with some spots of other cultures, of which some had issues with the British and others not.
So while one thing is resistance to being Britain’s junior partner – it is quite another thing to leave the family and join the arch enemies. Like others have already said, I think we need some major PoDs back in the 19th century to have USA side with Britain’s enemies.
Anyway, I actually doubt if USA siding with Germany in 1918 alone will win the war for Germany. Their bolt in 1918 was the Spring offensive, but that bolt was shot and wasted before the US contribution on Entente side had any significance. Until summer/autumn 18 only few and green US troops were at the front, and the Entente, especially France, had delivered most of the heavy weaponry from their own stocks.
And even if there is a significant US Army existing, it will have serious trouble reaching the European fronts. In combination the USN and the HSF sure have numbers to challenge the RN, but having the two fleets join before being beaten in detail by the RN is a very difficult operation – geography is very much on the British side. Next the USN before joining the GF in OTL 1917-18 and learning from joint exercises etc. had a lot of deficiencies, not at least in gunnery. The hitting frequency of a USN battleship would be something like 50% or less of a contemporary RN BB! On top of this USN heavy shells at this time had a tendency to break up at certain impact angles, while the RN was introducing the very much improved Green Boy shells (after the experience at Jutland in 1916). The USN armour principle of “all or nothing” was ideal for long range (Pacific) gunnery, but would leave the USN ships more exposed to soft kills by medium gunnery at the shorter battle ranges in the misty waters around the British Isles.
The biggest impact would probably be psychology on the Entente side of not having the OTL hope for fresh US troops but on the contrary having to face yet another challenge. Everybody has a breaking point, and I’m not sure that of the Entente was that far away by 1918.
But OTOH another “Glorious 1st of June” this time vs. the USN, would certainly boost Entente morale.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
Top