WWI Result without American Involvement

[Wendell]

Lets see, the CP started the whole bloody shooting match, the Germans spent the war raping Belgium and fought their western campaign camped in France's main industrial area, whilst the A-H's were out to annex all of the Southern Slavs. What do you think would be more equitable?

Personally, I think they should have stripped the Ruhr of industrial and mining equipment to replace that destroyed or stolen from France and Belgium, and reduced Germany to an agrarian economy for a generation or two.

Both the A-H and Ottoman Empires were already coming apart at the seams, and the best thing that could have happened to both of them was the break up, and in the case of the Ottomans, the secularization of Turkey.

Yet, France was in far better shape with a more generous peace after the war in which it tried to conquer Europe

 

[Wendell]

The problem with the scenario you propose is that any cease-fire that occurs without the German Army having been shattered as per OTL is, in the strategic sense, a win for Germany. This is because the war would then presumably end with Germans still in Belgium and maybe parts of northern France, and (unlike in OTL) the Entente would not have the ability to evict them further. This leaves Germany in a much better negotiating position from the get-go.

More importantly, however, a failure by the Entente to decisively beat the Germans means that Brest-Litovsk is not invalidated, with the result that a huge chunk of European Russia becomes what amounts to an economic colony of Germany.

And what, in your view, would this peace entail beyond Europe?

 

[Gladi]

If the US is actually committed to neutrality (read: attempting to avoid being drawn into the war), I don't think that Wilson would have allowed any volunteer force large enough to be useful to head to Europe. And he was more than enough of a bastard to have effective (if unpleasant) steps taken to avoid such a provocation.

The PoD is not USA comitting to neutrality,but never entering war . And he allowed it before the official declaration.

There were 8 Infantry Divisions and 13 Cyclist Battallions kept in the Home Islands for defence from invasion.

Ah.

 

[Redbeard]

The problem with the scenario you propose is that any cease-fire that occurs without the German Army having been shattered as per OTL is, in the strategic sense, a win for Germany. This is because the war would then presumably end with Germans still in Belgium and maybe parts of northern France, and (unlike in OTL) the Entente would not have the ability to evict them further. This leaves Germany in a much better negotiating position from the get-go.

More importantly, however, a failure by the Entente to decisively beat the Germans means that Brest-Litovsk is not invalidated, with the result that a huge chunk of European Russia becomes what amounts to an economic colony of Germany.

I don't see that. The Germans were well aware that their last chance was the spring offensive and hoped the desparete attempts in summer 1918 could at least improve their position at the bargaining table. With a million fresh American troops by autumn 1918 the Entente did not need to accept anything but an armistice 100% in their favour, but without "the Yanks" I'm not sure they would be as cocky.

They of course could not accept the Germans remaining anywhere in Belgium or France, but given the option of withdrawing in good order and with limited (compared to OTL Versailles) reparations I guess there is a godd chance the Germans will accept withdrawing with an intact army. They would be very well aware that an intact army is the only good guarantee for not loosing the coming German civil war/revolution.

I'm certain there will be a lot of civil unrest everywhere, in Germany a civil war/revolution at least as serious as the OTL one. Wilhelm and probably the Monarchy is doomed (a scapegoat for 4 years of war in vain is needed), but with not quite as harsh armistice conditions the nazis will have less fertile soil later on.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

 

[The Sandman]

And what, in your view, would this peace entail beyond Europe?

The German colonies stay lost. German East Africa might still be up in the air, since Lettow-Vorbeck, IIRC, didn't surrender until the end of the war (although he had been forced into Rhodesia by that point). Otherwise, the colonies were gone by 1915, and Germany doesn't have the ability to demand their return. Essentially, they would have won by holding on long enough to survive, not by actually defeating the British or French. The Germans might, however, be able to force the Italians to surrender their colonies.

The Ottomans are likely to take the Caucasus away from Russia; beyond that, they probably lose their Arab lands. Those were already falling in 1917, and Germany isn't going to prolong the war just to help the Ottomans.

 

[The Sandman]

I don't see that. The Germans were well aware that their last chance was the spring offensive and hoped the desparete attempts in summer 1918 could at least improve their position at the bargaining table. With a million fresh American troops by autumn 1918 the Entente did not need to accept anything but an armistice 100% in their favour, but without "the Yanks" I'm not sure they would be as cocky.

They of course could not accept the Germans remaining anywhere in Belgium or France, but given the option of withdrawing in good order and with limited (compared to OTL Versailles) reparations I guess there is a godd chance the Germans will accept withdrawing with an intact army. They would be very well aware that an intact army is the only good guarantee for not loosing the coming German civil war/revolution.

I'm certain there will be a lot of civil unrest everywhere, in Germany a civil war/revolution at least as serious as the OTL one. Wilhelm and probably the Monarchy is doomed (a scapegoat for 4 years of war in vain is needed), but with not quite as harsh armistice conditions the nazis will have less fertile soil later on.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

Not in vain; the Germans have an enormous chunk of Western Russia to show for their troubles.

As for the Germans in Belgium and Northern France, they wouldn't be allowed to stay there. However, since the British and French can't eject them by force, the Germans use the timing of their withdrawal and condition they leave the areas in as a bargaining chip against, for example, the withdrawal of the blockade.

 

[Bry]

The Allies would have won anyway (and the USA would not be as important as rl)... Versailles would likely have led to British annexation of former Hanover, French occupation of much of what was left of the South- West, and the splitting of the rest of Germany into tiny, insignificant states.
Very harsh, yes, but there would then be sufficient Anglo- French interests in the region that Germany would never be reunified, and Hitler would of course come to nothing...

 

[Mark AH]

Without the USA a the war was won by the central powers, but only if the economical support and the supplies of the USA wouldn’t arrive the allied countries.

 

[Magnum]

damit, this is so interesting, too bad I don't have time to read it all. I'm surprised at how many people think the CP would have won. I really don't think that's possible, but then, I didn't read all 4 pages of the debate. Even if they do much better with the Michael Offensive, there's still the thing that they can't really do much to stop Bulgaria and/or Turkey from eventually collapsing, wich would lead to AH beeing in pretty bad situation. Romania also rejoined the allies once victory seemed certain in late 1918, and AH was very close to collapse, so why wouldn't this happen in this TL ? Remember how Ah had to confiscate a few german barges stacked with grain that were sailing up the Danube to keep the city from starving ? Or the huge losses the Germans suffered during their offensive ? From what I know, the Americans had nothing to do with Bulgaria's collapse, wich had a more or less domino-effect on the CP.

 

[Wendell]

The German colonies stay lost. German East Africa might still be up in the air, since Lettow-Vorbeck, IIRC, didn't surrender until the end of the war (although he had been forced into Rhodesia by that point). Otherwise, the colonies were gone by 1915, and Germany doesn't have the ability to demand their return. Essentially, they would have won by holding on long enough to survive, not by actually defeating the British or French. The Germans might, however, be able to force the Italians to surrender their colonies.

The Ottomans are likely to take the Caucasus away from Russia; beyond that, they probably lose their Arab lands. Those were already falling in 1917, and Germany isn't going to prolong the war just to help the Ottomans.

The Italians losing their colonies to the Germans is an interesting idea.

 

[luakel]

But IMO, all it means is that Britain gets some new land...

 

[Damar1]

Sorry to throw a wrench into this...

Does the Zimmerman Telegram still happen in this TL? IIRC, the message was sent from Germany to Mexico b4 the US chose a declaration of war. In that case, how does the US chose to respond to this news. One theory is that the news of such a message from Zimmerman is dismissed as fraudulent. Another is that the the Telegram is not even made public altogether.

Another ? is, does the Spanish Influenza still become as widespread? Some theories speculate that it originated in the US (including Kansas {?}). Is there still a Pandemic anyway, or is it more confined to North America?

 

[chris N]

WW I without American Involvement

Without the massive american manpower that the US was able to put on the Battlefield the chances are that the Allies would have cracked wide open in 1918. The is strong indication that both France and Britain were becoming quite war weary and the Muntiny in the French Army in 1917 had made that army quite fragile.

 

[stevep]

Without the massive american manpower that the US was able to put on the Battlefield the chances are that the Allies would have cracked wide open in 1918. The is strong indication that both France and Britain were becoming quite war weary and the Muntiny in the French Army in 1917 had made that army quite fragile.

Chris

I don't know about that. The mutiny was brought about largely by discontentment about what were seen as reckless attacks plus bad management of the troops. For instance denying troops leave. After spring 1917 the French army did relatively little attacking but they were still more than willing to defend their homeland. Petain had also sorted out the leave problem which did a lot to help the moral situation.

As an earlier poster said the US troops played very little role in stopping the spring offensives. They came into play far more when the allied counter attacks started really pushing the Germans back. I also doubt that the Germans would have delayed the spring offensive if the US had not declared war. The entire psychology of the military in virtually all countries at the time was that the offensive was the only way to win. Also, while they probably didn't realise how bad the situation was the German generals knew Germany was in a dire state and its allies in even worse condition.

As such I think that probably the allies would still have won, either late in 1918 or in 1919. Germany and its allies were simply too spent. Don't forget that the spring offensives cost the Germans a hell of a lot of troops with especially heavy losses from the specially trained storm-trooper units. Even while troops were being shipped west from the eastern front there were major signs of growing disillusionment in the German army and population. There is the danger that everybody might lose, more than they did, with not just the central powers but also possibly at least some allies collapsing into social disorder and chaos.

Steve

 

[Bavarian Raven]

...did anyone stop to think that the world might be a better place if the CP won because then World War Two would have not happened...

 

[danwild6]

Stalemate!!!

No American intervention no Micheal offensive. Its seems rather a glaring oversight that many of us are forgetting that the spring 1918 offensive was a direct result of American intervention. I can see Germany making peace overtures to France and Britain after Brest-Litovsk. Status quo ante bell um is a possibility but Britain and France do have most of Germany's overseas colonies as bargaining chips. If Britain and France stay united at the peace table they may get European territorial concessions from Germany in exchange for returning her colonies.

 

[Jasen777]

If the U.S. is "neutral" in the way they were before entering the war in OTL, then the CP will still likely lose. And get a harsher peace without Wilson being involved.

 

[HurganPL]

...did anyone stop to think that the world might be a better place if the CP won because then World War Two would have not happened...

CP victory means slavery, forced labour and racist discrimination for tens and tens of milions of non-German people of Mitteleuropa, and ethnic cleansing of milions to make room for German colonists. Also likely is the use of famine and mass executions to speed up Germanisation.
As Russia and Britain, France are likely to plot their revenge
WW2 will occur just as well. Perhaps shorter then original but more brutal with Germany developing atom bomb first and Russia using massive chemical weapons counterstrike. Odds are against Germany this time too when it comes to possible victory.
Be assured that any WW2 conflict will bring further ethnic cleansing and genocide along similar patterns as in our OTL. Germany will blame its economical and political problems on Polish agents and reprisals towards the whole population will follow. However paradoxically it might be Germany that in this TL would rely on Jewish support in Mitteleuropa (in OTL there were some plans like that by Max Boddenhaimer) while Ukrainian, Russian, Polish forces would engage in attacks on Jews seeing them as tools of German Empire.

 

[Superdude]

Hurgan, I don't think you are contributing to anything in this thread.

 

[HurganPL]

I don't think you are contributing to anything in this thread.

I don't think this thread is titled about fantasies about German dominated world but discussion of consequences of lack of American involvment in the war, including potential German victory. Such an outcome would led to German Empire's fulfilling its plans.
And I never understood why CP victory would mean no WW2-AH is an unstable house of cards requiring German protection and support, Germany faces resistance in Mitteleuropa as it tries to change it into German colony, while Russia and Britain cooperate from 20s against Germany. Let's face it-any CP victory would temporary and war would start again as Russia and Britain rebuild themselfs, with France joining them at Germany's hour of weakness.

If Britain and France stay united at the peace table they may get European territorial concessions from Germany in exchange for returning her colonies.

I don't remember which German exactly, but there is famous saying "Inflants alone are worth to us more then all of Pacific colonies together".