WI: No Siege of Kut (1915)

IOTL, during the mesopotamian campaign of WWI, british forces were achieving victories in southern Iraq. The british commander, Charles Townshend, could not hold his excitement and ordered a quick advance towards the city of Kut-al-amara, despite the fact that his supply train could not catch up in speed. British forces and indian auxiliaries hunkered down in the city in december 1915 and were promptly besieged by the ottomans, who managed to destroy all relief attempts. Townshend's forces eventually surrendered after five months of fighting and were taken as PoW's, and the battle ended up as a significant, if a bit forgotten, disaster.
But what if Townshend had either been born with more neurons or sacked from his post earlier, preventing the hasty rush towards Kut? How could this change the mesopotamian front?
 
Interesting question. It may not have had that much of an impact on the Mesopotamian campaign itself - a significant problem for the Brits was logistics, so I'm not sure they would have been able to advance on Baghdad before 1917 regardless of whether Townshend's division survives or not. On the other hand, if the Brits don't learn the importance of logistics and to stop underestimating the Ottomans as a result of the siege of Kut, it may just set up the Brits for an even bigger catastrophe down the road (i.e. a failed advance on Baghdad in 1916).
 

Insider

Banned
Let the Ottomans give Brits a bloody nose early on, and Townshend would proceed with greater caution.
 
Top