WW1 without France.

With a pod after 1871 have a major European war after 1900 with Germany, the Ottomans and Austria on one side and Britain, Russia and Italy on the other. With France neutral at the start. In my opinion the only realistic pod would be if Germany somehow keeps France isolated.

If a Great War like this happened who would likely win? And would France be tempted to join?
 
Germany clearly stomps. In OTL it was Germany vs Russia and France and Russia was stomped.
 
It would be tough to have a land war in Europe involving Germany without France after the Franco-Prussian war. You can peel the UK off the Entente but France is pretty intrinsic to any conflict involving Germany that could possibly come to be labeled a "World War".
 
The UK only got involved in WWI because of France and Belgium.

Italy only entered because of territorial promises made by France and the UK.

So if France wasn't involved, there would be no Britain or Italy either.

The war would be a localised Central & Eastern European affair which the Germans and Austro-Hungarians would easily win.
 

Deleted member 1487

With a pod after 1871 have a major European war after 1900 with Germany, the Ottomans and Austria on one side and Britain, Russia and Italy on the other. With France neutral at the start. In my opinion the only realistic pod would be if Germany somehow keeps France isolated.

If a Great War like this happened who would likely win? And would France be tempted to join?
Italy and Britain wouldn't come in the war if France wasn't in the war. Russia would be on its own with Serbia. France wouldn't stay neutral in a war with German given the post-1871 POD unless perhaps there was a Franco-German war in 1904-5 and France is just a puppet of Germany, which is impossible because France is way too rational to engage in a war against Germany 1-on-1.
 

jahenders

Banned
With a pod after 1871 have a major European war after 1900 with Germany, the Ottomans and Austria on one side and Britain, Russia and Italy on the other. With France neutral at the start. In my opinion the only realistic pod would be if Germany somehow keeps France isolated.

If a Great War like this happened who would likely win? And would France be tempted to join?

If France is neutral, everything changes. Germany doesn't violate Belgium, UK doesn't join, and neither does Italy. The Ottoman Empire is doubtful. What you wind up with is not a world war -- it might be called something like "The Great Eastern War" or "The Greater Balkans War." Germany and Austria quickly destroy Serbia and pummel Serbia's Russian allies. Russia quickly sues for peace and may, or may not, then face a revolution.

Actually, if Russia doesn't have a pretty good agreement with France, Russia isn't going to even agree to support Serbia on the battlefield. So, really, Serbia gets spanked badly and everything ends -- it's the xxth Balkans War
 

Deleted member 94680

It was a long standing British foreign policy goal to maintain the Balance of Power on the continent.

  • War with France under Napoleon.

  • War with Russia over control of the Ottoman Empire.

  • War with Germany when France looked in danger of being destroyed.

There's every chance that a Neutral France (unlikely as that is post 1871) wouldn't stop Britain being involved to prevent German hegemony.
 
It was a long standing British foreign policy goal to maintain the Balance of Power on the continent.

  • War with France under Napoleon.

  • War with Russia over control of the Ottoman Empire.

  • War with Germany when France looked in danger of being destroyed.

There's every chance that a Neutral France (unlikely as that is post 1871) wouldn't stop Britain being involved to prevent German hegemony.

Yes but Britain would not be fighting directly in this example of a Continental war - more likely Britain would be fighting to the Last Russian and Turk ;)

i.e. Bank rolling them
 

Deleted member 94680

Yes but Britain would not be fighting directly in this example of a Continental war - more likely Britain would be fighting to the Last Russian and Turk ;)

i.e. Bank rolling them

There's always the Bank of England as a potent weapon.

But with Russia and Italy as belligerents, there's plenty of places in (or accessed from) the Mediterranean that a British expeditionary force could be landed...
 
There's always the Bank of England as a potent weapon.

But with Russia and Italy as belligerents, there's plenty of places in (or accessed from) the Mediterranean that a British expeditionary force could be landed...

Oh certainly there is...but....

Going to war over Belgium and France is one thing - the British people would go for that but a full blown Continental war with lads battalions et all for some johnny foreigner on the other side of Europe - thats a much harder sell.

I can see the Navy and Professional army may be involved - but I dont see 3 million men under arms by 1916!
 

Deleted member 94680

Going to war over Belgium and France is one thing - the British people would go for that but a full blown Continental war with lads battalions et all for some johnny foreigner on the other side of Europe - thats a much harder sell.

I can see the Navy and Professional army may be involved - but I dont see 3 million men under arms by 1916!

Oh god no, but the Indian Army is there for the using and the Regulars would available. After that, it depends how the War went whether more troops would be needed.

The Jingo press could whip up enthusiasm for the conflict, given the chance. Maybe a new music hall number to get the crowds skipping to the recruiting booths...
 

jahenders

Banned
Yes but Britain would not be fighting directly in this example of a Continental war - more likely Britain would be fighting to the Last Russian and Turk ;)

i.e. Bank rolling them

I agree that's possible, though unlikely -- supporting Russia monetarily is possible, along with fighting for control of the seas, and maybe some colonial actions in Africa. I can't see them fighting their way through the Baltic to land armies in Germany or Russia to slug it out.

I guess they could conceivably ally with Holland or Belgium and land troops there, they they'd have to allow it and risk German attack. Even then, I can't see them putting anywhere near the forces they used in WW1 IOTL, not to mention they'd NEVER approach the combined France/UK troop counts.
 

Deleted member 94680

... I can't see them fighting their way through the Baltic to land armies in Germany or Russia to slug it out.

I guess they could conceivably ally with Holland or Belgium and land troops there, they they'd have to allow it and risk German attack. Even then, I can't see them putting anywhere near the forces they used in WW1 IOTL, not to mention they'd NEVER approach the combined France/UK troop counts.

They wouldn't necessarily need to go that way, as troops landed in Italy could cross the Alps into A-H. Fighting Germany would probably be left to Russia with British supplies and money propping the Tsar's armies up.
 
IIRC there were several instances during 1871-1900s where a conflict between Germany and France could have erupted. Assume germany (again) steamrolls France. France maybe develops an unrational "fear" about germany instead of revanchism.

As effect GErmany is left with no real enemy in Europe

Assume Germany goes full colonial - maybe in Asia too - Make a German Japanese alliance - then you might end up with a German-British standoff in Africa (Especially if Germany grabs more land that is OTL a French colony) and German /Russian /British one in Asia.

THE OE would probably be in the German camp - British backed Greece and Russian backed Bulgaria(Serbia?) wanting pieces of the OE...

Germany might probably need a large army in the west to prevent a French attack (which might come - it is even logical, but in this scenario not necessarily at the beginning). IF Britain sends an epeditionary force to Russia it might be the backbone around which russian units can build a good defense.

(assumuing roughly the same capacities of the various countries)

Italy might not be in the war from the beginning, but I don't see an obstacle that it aligns with Britain from the beginning.

A good reason GErmany and Britain are at worse relations is a German Somalia where Britain fears the Suez route is cut off...
 
May be if the battle ground is a semi collapsed Ottoman empire Russia moves south looking for the warm water port with easy access to the Mediterranean. Britain attempts to secure the Suez canal to protect it trade to India and maybe grab some oil field, Italy has Mussolini type want to be Caesar who has designs on new roman empire (Lebanon , Syria even Constantinople) . Germany is backing the Northern parts for access to Persian oil via the Berlin to Baghdad railway. As Britain is blocking German shipping all troops, supplies and weapons go through Austria.
 

Deleted member 94680

A good reason Germany and Britain are at worse relations is a German Somalia where Britain fears the Suez route is cut off...

Now that is a neat and tidy POD to start things rolling, I like it.

A 'definite' German 'threat' to the British sea lanes to India would make Anglo-German relations far worse than OTL, meaning there's a reason for Britain to get involved earlier if there is German aggression. Especially with Kaiser Wilhelm II and his, ahem, unique approach to international relations. Also, it seems the Italians respected Islam as the religion of the Somalis and utilised the stronger tribes in their organisation of the colony - would the Germans (nation of the Herero genocide) cope as well? Apart from the ports into the Iandian Ocean, would the Somali colony provide econominc benefits to the Reich?

Italy might not be in the war from the beginning, but I don't see an obstacle that it aligns with Britain from the beginning.

German exploitation of Somalia might be a cause of emnity between Germany and Italy, pushing Rome towards the British from the get-go.
 
With France neutral, I see no reason why Russia should want to join this war, so Germany has to go out of their way to start it. However, I don't see how you can keep France neutral, as Germany knocking out Russia is an existential threat to France itself.

Long story short - either both France AND Russia are in this war, or neither of them are - in which case its just a matter of Britain occupying German colonies until the Germans cry "Uncle!"
 

Deleted member 94680

With France neutral, I see no reason why Russia should want to join this war, so Germany has to go out of their way to start it. However, I don't see how you can keep France neutral, as Germany knocking out Russia is an existential threat to France itself.

Long story short - either both France AND Russia are in this war, or neither of them are - in which case its just a matter of Britain occupying German colonies until the Germans cry "Uncle!"

With a pod after 1871 have a major European war after 1900 with Germany, the Ottomans and Austria on one side and Britain, Russia and Italy on the other. With France neutral at the start. In my opinion the only realistic pod would be if Germany somehow keeps France isolated.

If the Turks are fighting, there's always a chance the Russians would want to get involved - CONSTANTINOPLE! All the Italians/Brits/whoever else would have to promise to St Petersburg is occupation of Nova Roma "according to the time-honoured aspirations of Russia".
 
If the Turks are fighting, there's always a chance the Russians would want to get involved - CONSTANTINOPLE! All the Italians/Brits/whoever else would have to promise to St Petersburg is occupation of Nova Roma "according to the time-honoured aspirations of Russia".
they already did that OTL.
 
Top