In terms of effects for the Western Entente.....they're screwed.
A million or so troops heading their way, before American entry, is going to batter Britain's army, but especially France's.
If the Germans plan it out well, I see them at the base of the Eiffel Tower by mid-1917 at the earliest. Later, maybe.
But if America still joins, Germany is still screwed.
No, because the occupation of vast territory in 1918 was a move to get Russia resources in anticipation of a long struggle with the US AND as a pressure tactic to make the Bolsheviks agree to peace. If Russia exits the war before the Revolution, then Germany keeps Poland and Lithuania and doesn't have to move further East. That leaves at most 300k to occupy both of those, probably more like 200k or less, most being A-H troops, freeing up Germans for the West or demobilizing them to work farms.Why would they have a million more troops? Wouldn't those same troops be held down garrisoning the east like they were in OTL? And even if they did, what good is a million more troops into a battlefield as static as 1916? 700,000 dead troops on the Somme got the allies what, 7 miles of territory?
Why would they have a million more troops? Wouldn't those same troops be held down garrisoning the east like they were in OTL? And even if they did, what good is a million more troops into a battlefield as static as 1916? 700,000 dead troops on the Somme got the allies what, 7 miles of territory?
No, because the occupation of vast territory in 1918 was a move to get Russia resources in anticipation of a long struggle with the US AND as a pressure tactic to make the Bolsheviks agree to peace. If Russia exits the war before the Revolution, then Germany keeps Poland and Lithuania and doesn't have to move further East. That leaves at most 300k to occupy both of those, probably more like 200k or less, most being A-H troops, freeing up Germans for the West or demobilizing them to work farms.
1 million more troops is only part of the deal, its also thousands of artillery pieces, enabling the Germans to launch multiple offensive at once, like the Allies did in late 1918. They outnumber and outgun the Western Entente in 1916-17 so can overwhelm them. More likely though they negotiate if Russia exits in 1916 rather than face the whole German military without the US in the war.
No it was a numbers game in 1918. The Germans were finally outnumbered 2:1 and the Allies had an overwhelming firepower and mobility advantage on top of that. German troops just ran out of morale and numbers. The Entente of 1916 were in the same boat considering that the Germans had inflicted significantly more casualties than they had taken in the West and were posed to do that again; now just imagine their 1918 offensive success in 1917, but without American material to back up the 1917 war effort. Plus without the US the French were already convinced they couldn't win and would likely fall apart.Even with those extra troops I can't see the Germans punching through. It was never really a numbers game, was it? I thought it was a change in tactics, organisation, and technology that made the difference in 1918 (plus the morale boost from the Americans and the bravery of the Kiel mutineers to finally say "no more")
Given how the Germans frittered away troops in their OTL attacks, and that with the Russians knocked out the Entente will go fully on the defensive so a German victory is far from certain and the Entente has significant advantages in 1916. In 1918 the British were in the middle of a major reorganization, the politicians wouldn't release available reserves, and the French had suffered heavily at Verdun and from the post Nivelle offensive mutinies. Add to that German tactics weren't as refined in 1916 as they were in 1918 and yes maybe they make a breakthrough but I think the chances are about even that they suffer another failure and perhaps start to crack up, after all with amounts to the last reserve used a lot of people in Germany would be asking 'now what?'Even with those extra troops I can't see the Germans punching through. It was never really a numbers game, was it? I thought it was a change in tactics, organisation, and technology that made the difference in 1918 (plus the morale boost from the Americans and the bravery of the Kiel mutineers to finally say "no more")
No, because the occupation of vast territory in 1918 was a move to get Russia resources in anticipation of a long struggle with the US AND as a pressure tactic to make the Bolsheviks agree to peace.
1 million more troops is only part of the deal, its also thousands of artillery pieces, enabling the Germans to launch multiple offensive at once, like the Allies did in late 1918. They outnumber and outgun the Western Entente in 1916-17 so can overwhelm them. More likely though they negotiate if Russia exits in 1916 rather than face the whole German military without the US in the war.
H-L only got onboard with the land grab IOTL because negotiations dragged on and they got tired of sitting around. The Kaiser was pretty much powerless, so he's got nothing to do with anything. Ukraine as a protectorate would be on the table, but the OTL Brest-Litovsk deal was a product of Bolshevik stalling, waiting for a revolution in Germany to moot the negotiations, so the Germans advanced and took what they could and then turned around and said make a deal or else.Well that's certainly an unusual take on Brest-Litovsk. If Russia exits the war relatively intact Germany is going to have to keep a large part of its forces watching the border, if on the other hand Russia is in chaos are you seriously suggesting the Kaiser isn't going to go on a land grab with L and H going along enthusiastically.
Michael was definitely a bigger disaster for the Allies; without the US paying for the Entente war effort from April 1917 on the Entente is running out of money to pay and the French army is mutinying for negotiations, while the peace movement in France is rioting in January 1918 and required French troops to break up with force. France is going to want to exit the war without the Russians or US in it. Especially if the Germans start with a Caporetto offensive ITTL then the Italians are going to be effectively neutralized and may make a separate peace if the Russians got that ball rolling. At that point the French are done for in terms of moral and willingness to fight to the bitter end.Well unlikely to be the full million for reasons stated, and L and H did try multiple offensives in 1918, with fairly disastrous results, they also had arty superiority for the early stages of those battles.
As the title says how would this effect how the rest of the war plays out.