WW1 the Germans fight on...

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

This is not the typical thread about what if the Germans fought instead of negotiating. I am concerned about the American participation in the fight. OTL the Germans sued for peace based on Wilson's 14 points. Instead, the Americans ended up dropping out and signing a seperate peace with the Allies signed Versailles. So, my question is, if the Germans decided that instead of agreeing to an armistice with the blockade still on they get their act together and fight for a fair peace based on the 14 points. Ludendorff manages to rally the army near the border.

What about the Americans? They expressed that they want peace, based upon Wilson's model and won't fight a war of conquest. Would the AEF fight for a peace based on Versailles?
 
This is not the typical thread about what if the Germans fought instead of negotiating. I am concerned about the American participation in the fight. OTL the Germans sued for peace based on Wilson's 14 points. Instead, the Americans ended up dropping out and signing a seperate peace with the Allies signed Versailles. So, my question is, if the Germans decided that instead of agreeing to an armistice with the blockade still on they get their act together and fight for a fair peace based on the 14 points. Ludendorff manages to rally the army near the border.

What about the Americans? They expressed that they want peace, based upon Wilson's model and won't fight a war of conquest. Would the AEF fight for a peace based on Versailles?

I will say this, even if the Allies dont get the benefit of US troops the Germans are screwed, American involvment was in-consequencial.

If what you say happens then the next day their is a revolution in Germany, Ludendorff and Hindenburg are court martialed and shot and any army left fighting is beaten
 

MrP

Banned
If the German government won't agree to peace, it seems likely that civil unrest will destroy it from within.
 
The British and French march into Berlin sometime in 1919 and dictate far more draconian terms to Germany than Versailles did. The country partitioned, disarmed, and subjected to far worse reparations. It is necessary to remember that, by November 11, 1918, Germany was completely isolated. It had already lost the vast majority of its allies, its army was in retreat, its navy in revolt, and its government teetering.
 

Susano

Banned
Well, at the end of the war the German Army was still on foreign soil, but the problem was that the German front was so thinned out that it was feared the allies would just breach the front and overrun Germany. A... realistic assessment, I would say. In the end, it would make all sides (France and UK, too) more miserably, because quelching every little nest of resistance will be hard on their ressources, too. Could become quite a dystopian scenario...
 

MrP

Banned
Well, at the end of the war the German Army was still on foreign soil, but the problem was that the German front was so thinned out that it was feared the allies would just breach the front and overrun Germany. A... realistic assessment, I would say. In the end, it would make all sides (France and UK, too) more miserably, because quelching every little nest of resistance will be hard on their ressources, too. Could become quite a dystopian scenario...

OTOH, it squelches that "stab in the back" myth.
 
The Germans fight on until either late 1918 or early 1919, at which point their home front implodes. The Allies march pretty much unmolested from Aachen to Breslau, with the exception of putting down a nascent communist revolution every 70 klicks. Germany gets dismembered.
 
Well, at the end of the war the German Army was still on foreign soil, but the problem was that the German front was so thinned out that it was feared the allies would just breach the front and overrun Germany. A... realistic assessment, I would say. In the end, it would make all sides (France and UK, too) more miserably, because quelching every little nest of resistance will be hard on their ressources, too. Could become quite a dystopian scenario...

Hmmm. Its possible, but I suspect a proper victory would do something to make the British and French less miserable. In Germany there might not be a 'stabbed in the back myth', although that I doubt, as people in this period rare blamed "the nation" and always looked and found a scapegoat. For patriots there would always be someone to point at and say they failed to do their duty.

France and especially Britain however might avoid the "maybe they collapsed on their own" myth. The second half of 1918 constituted a major success and a follow up in 1919 would go someway to wiping away the memory of earlier debacles. A changed debate and a different view of the war might promote a more confident foreign policy on the part of the entente powers in the 20's and 30's which would have notable effects. It is hardly impossible these might be positive.

Not sure about dismemberment. I just don't see where the fault lines are and I doubt any of the entente powers will be willing to retain the hundreds of thousands of troops in Germany to maintain these artificial lines. Far more likely is that Poland is encouraged to take East Prussia if she is able and the French get their border on the Rhine.

Not really sure on the impact for the USA. Frankly they won't quit while Germany is in the war, but at the same time I doubt they will hang around to really hammer out details for the peace. I suspect something similar to OTL might occur, especially as this treaty will be stronger than Versailles.
 
Several nations do quite allright even with nasty nationalist myths. Id say that really isnt worth is ;)

The problem with that myth is while the political part of it is bollocks, it explains the fast downfall very good.

Unrest was identified mainly as unrest coming from workers in the industrial areas, so they were ringed with garrissons. For wartimes, the Rear Area and Ersatz units should replace the Field Army. Now, surprise, Rear Area troops start the revolution.
 

Germaniac

Donor
However if French Troops enter germany dont you think the German people will find a common ground and fight on. While the war is being fought in another country people aren't as prone to support, however if the war is defensive in nature it might rally people to the cause.
 
However if French Troops enter germany dont you think the German people will find a common ground and fight on. While the war is being fought in another country people aren't as prone to support, however if the war is defensive in nature it might rally people to the cause.

It didnt help broken germany in WW2, the people would rather have peace on any terms than fights
 

MrP

Banned
However if French Troops enter germany dont you think the German people will find a common ground and fight on. While the war is being fought in another country people aren't as prone to support, however if the war is defensive in nature it might rally people to the cause.

It depends on how both sides behave. Belgian civilian* resistance to German invasion was swept away by the German Army at the start of the war. While most variables are different at the end of the war, I can see the French Army achieving the same result against German civilian resistance.

* Although I saw something interesting on this the other day.
 
However if French Troops enter germany dont you think the German people will find a common ground and fight on. While the war is being fought in another country people aren't as prone to support, however if the war is defensive in nature it might rally people to the cause.

I doubt it, if the Field Army is broken, (and think of the losses!) the morale is also broken.

IIRC
The generals concluded, although around the time of the Versailles treaty, they could hold a line- but this would mean giving up western and southern Germany.
 

Susano

Banned
The problem with that myth is while the political part of it is bollocks, it explains the fast downfall very good.

Unrest was identified mainly as unrest coming from workers in the industrial areas, so they were ringed with garrissons. For wartimes, the Rear Area and Ersatz units should replace the Field Army. Now, surprise, Rear Area troops start the revolution.

It doesnt matter. The war was lost. With what speed, who cares? At least it got us rid of Idiot Billy and established a proper republic.
 

MrP

Banned
Right, so why did the allies have to march all the way to bloody Berlin?

a) What Steffen said.
b) To take up positions previously agreed.
c) So as not to upset Stalin.
d) So as to upset Stalin.
e) A spot of exercise for the men.
f) They were at a loose end . . .
 
It doesnt matter. The war was lost. With what speed, who cares? At least it got us rid of Idiot Billy and established a proper republic.

Fascinating book about this period: Georg Maercker: Vom Kaiserheer zur Reichswehr. Geschichte des freiwilligen Landesjägerkorps. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der deutschen Revolution. Leipzig, 1921

Maercker was a regular army general whose Freikorps protected the Weimar National Assembly
 
Top