WW1 related question. . .

Rfl23

Aghasverov said:
There would definitely have to be some give-and-take on either side...
If you think about it, the surrenders of the CP in 1918 were a fairly remarkable thing... there were no Entente troops in Berlin (or for that matter in any of the capitals of the constituent states of the Empire)... none in Vienna or Budapest, nor Sofiya, and none yet in Constantinople (though there would be soon enough...) On the other hand, Germans still occupied Belgium and a wide swath of France, the KuK had not quite been pushed out of Italy, and a million-strong German and Austro-Hungarian force was spread out over a huge area of what had been the western Guberniyas of Russia.... it's easy to see how conspiratorial nonsense like the dolchstosslegende came to the fore. Granted, it didn't help that many were starving, or close to it...
In a true "white peace", it's hard to imagine anything like the Freikorps springing up...
Click to expand...
I guess if a status quo ending is achieved it will either return to normal (considered a european war) or only in europe it will stay the same (ie the german colonies are still split and the ottoman are perhaps still broken up) but i would think the freikorps can still sprink up if let say the colonies are still taken and the german still had to pay reparations (i dunno will it lead to a socialist movement like in otl but if russia still fell to communism then i dunno) and as for austria hungary? Its quite complicated actually maybe they still split up but i dunno
 
Aghasverov

Aghasverov

Rfl23 said:
I guess if a status quo ending is achieved it will either return to normal (considered a european war) or only in europe it will stay the same (ie the german colonies are still split and the ottoman are perhaps still broken up) but i would think the freikorps can still sprink up if let say the colonies are still taken and the german still had to pay reparations (i dunno will it lead to a socialist movement like in otl but if russia still fell to communism then i dunno) and as for austria hungary? Its quite complicated actually maybe they still split up but i dunno
Click to expand...
Aaaand that's what makes the topic of alternate endings for WWI so fascinating... no one really knows, but there are many paths that could be taken.... ;)
 

Rfl23

Aghasverov said:
Aaaand that's what makes the topic of alternate endings for WWI so fascinating... no one really knows, but there are many paths that could be taken.... ;)
Click to expand...
Yeah its very interesting (hoi4 mods kr and fr wink wink) and the future impact of said event is huge
 
Aghasverov

Aghasverov

Rfl23 said:
Yeah its very interesting (hoi4 mods kr and fr wink wink) and the future impact of said event is huge
Click to expand...
Never played 'em, though the more I hang out here, the more I feel I should :p
All I know is that the 20th Century as we have known it was sort of a shit-fest, and it's very tempting to imagine something better, even if marginally...
 

Rfl23

Aghasverov said:
Never played 'em, though the more I hang out here, the more I feel I should :p
All I know is that the 20th Century as we have known it was sort of a shit-fest, and it's very tempting to imagine something better, even if marginally...
Click to expand...
Both are very interesting mods for sure (i think in fr the equivalent of nazi is valkism) but it is true the 20th century is basically a circus and any attempt to "make it better" will ussualy ends up being more of a circus in itself
 
Aghasverov

Aghasverov

Rfl23 said:
Both are very interesting mods for sure (i think in fr the equivalent of nazi is valkism) but it is true the 20th century is basically a circus and any attempt to "make it better" will ussualy ends up being more of a circus in itself
Click to expand...
Alas, that is also a possibility... but as I've said before in another thread, it would've taken a pretty dystopic imagination writing in, say, 1910 to come up with the insanity that happened IOTL over the next 100 years...
 

Rfl23

Aghasverov said:
Alas, that is also a possibility... but as I've said before in another thread, it would've taken a pretty dystopic imagination writing in, say, 1910 to come up with the insanity that happened IOTL over the next 100 years...
Click to expand...
True it will be quite dystopic but that what makes alternate history fun
 

Rickshaw

marathag said:
No, because he would be the only mass murderer on that scale, and with luck, the last one
Click to expand...
What about the Ottomans and their Armenian Genocide? Forgotten them? What about the various other colonial powers such as the British in India? The US in the Philippines. Seems to me you are being rather particular about your remembering...
 
marathag

marathag

Banned
Rickshaw said:
What about the Ottomans and their Armenian Genocide? Forgotten them? What about the various other colonial powers such as the British in India? The US in the Philippines. Seems to me you are being rather particular about your remembering...
Click to expand...
No WWI, unlikely to happen.
US and UK didn't do deliberate genocides after WWI
 

Mikestone8

Rfl23 said:
I do wonder what of ww1 ended in a status quo/only a few concession (maybe like giving back alsace lorraine back to the french and south tyrol and trentino to tje italians)
Click to expand...
Trentino maybe. But would they concede the *German* part of S Tyrol?
 

Riain

Banned
Why would a victorious Germany give up any territory? The late war position was no gains in the west in recognition for the gains in the east and a guarantee of no punitive tariff barriers against German exports. I'd suggest that the defeated Western powers would pay Germany off with colonies to ensure they didn't lose any home territory.
 

Dorknought

Rickshaw said:
Very little. That was the British excuse. The British failed to manage the famine. Badly.
Click to expand...
https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/did-churchill-cause-the-bengal-famine/

"The charge stems from a 2009 book accusing Churchill of irresponsibility over Bengal that amounted to a war crime, repeated by scores of sources since. As Churchill once remarked, “I should think it was hardly possible to state the opposite of the truth with more precision.”"

"The truth—documented by Sir Martin Gilbert and Hillsdale College—is that Churchill did everything he could in the midst of world war to save the Bengalis; and that without him the famine would have been worse."
 

Rickshaw

Dorknought said:
https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/did-churchill-cause-the-bengal-famine/

"The charge stems from a 2009 book accusing Churchill of irresponsibility over Bengal that amounted to a war crime, repeated by scores of sources since. As Churchill once remarked, “I should think it was hardly possible to state the opposite of the truth with more precision.”"

"The truth—documented by Sir Martin Gilbert and Hillsdale College—is that Churchill did everything he could in the midst of world war to save the Bengalis; and that without him the famine would have been worse."
Click to expand...
Written by a self-serving British wannabe politician.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top