Would the world be a better place if Germany had won WWI?

[Lancer]

Does the line up matter as long as Germany wins? If the Germans had punched trough to Paris, and they were oh so close, would US entry have enabled us to retake France as in WW2? We needed the airforce and armor for that, yes? I imagine a peace treaty after the fall of France with France becoming Finlandized at best, a satalite at worst. For them it would have been two defeats in a row, remember 1870. The peace treaty would likely not have forced GB to give up its colonies in South Africa imo. No reason to, they control the seas, at least for the time being. The High Seas would still have been far inferior.

Zkrib, add to your list, Germany would have likely picked up north africa...subtract South Africa?

Ecthy, no, I don't think so. The Germans would be the continental power and the Brits the sea power. Until the Germans at least doubled their fleet this wouldn't change and doing so would likely drive GB and the US into a united front. Not until Russia got ramped up could there be an alliance to contest Germany on land, and only if the Germans made the mistake of leaving what remained of Russia after 1917 whole.

[Ecthy]

*tut* Russian build-up + American counterbalancing, no matter if nazi or not

[Lancer]

Germany would have ruled europe, no WW2 no matter? *tut* to you!

[Ecthy]

Dreamt of but would not.

[Dr Strangelove]

It depends upon what you mean by winning. If the original Schlieffen plan had worked the war would have been brief. Austro-Hungary would have made Serbia a protectorate, but I'm not sure what Germany would have gotten, possibly they would have received concessions in Poland and/or Belgium. Germany would still have to face a world dominated by massive empires in which its rivals had advantages. Resentment might have even hampered Germany's future economy. It's doubtful how much France and Britain would have changed, they would simply have gotten new leaders. Their empires would have been less stressed and possibly would have survived longer. Russia would also have probably weathered a brief war pretty well. Lenon would not have gotten a free ride back to Russia, so Tsarist rule would have survived for awhile longer. I'm certain that Nicholas' incompetence would have eventually forced his replacement, but his successort might havre been Michael or a constitutional government. Without the dramatic economic cycles caused by the war the US economy might not have spun out of control into a great depression. Furthermore their would have been no post-war revulsion towards Europe so isolationism would not have been a factor.

[Lancer]

Re: Re: Would the world be a better place if Germany had won WWI?

Originally posted by germanos


In fact, it was Germany that send Lenin in a sealed train through its own territory from Switzerland to Russia.

So, a victorious Germany would have meant they wouldn't have resorted to this panicky act aimed at aquiring a separate peace with Russia.

Then Communism would have remained focussed on its original goal of revolution in industrialized countries, making the victorious Kaiserreich a main target itself.

With both Germany and Russia still monarchies Europe would certainly have taken a very different path.

As for terrorism: A victorious Germany would probably have meant an undefeated Ottoman Empire, thus no independent Middle East. Not to mention no implementation of the Belfour declaration and the creation of a Jewish homeland.


Why oh why did you yanks had to step in and mess it all up?
ITS ALL AMERICA'S FAULT

Hey! America didn't abandon the Schliffen plan!

[Lancer]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
It depends upon what you mean by winning. If the original Schlieffen plan had worked the war would have been brief. Austro-Hungary would have made Serbia a protectorate, but I'm not sure what Germany would have gotten, possibly they would have received concessions in Poland and/or Belgium. Germany would still have to face a world dominated by massive empires in which its rivals had advantages. Resentment might have even hampered Germany's future economy. It's doubtful how much France and Britain would have changed, they would simply have gotten new leaders. Their empires would have been less stressed and possibly would have survived longer. Russia would also have probably weathered a brief war pretty well. Lenon would not have gotten a free ride back to Russia, so Tsarist rule would have survived for awhile longer. I'm certain that Nicholas' incompetence would have eventually forced his replacement, but his successort might havre been Michael or a constitutional government. Without the dramatic economic cycles caused by the war the US economy might not have spun out of control into a great depression. Furthermore their would have been no post-war revulsion towards Europe so isolationism would not have been a factor.

How would France have survived? Do you think the Germans would simply leave once again? Maybe they would leave a portion, not unlike Vichy.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Lancer
Zkrib, add to your list, Germany would have likely picked up north africa...subtract South Africa?

Au contraire. North African used to be Turkish vassel states.

If the Central Powers had triumphed, the Sultan would have retained all of the Middle East (and Israel would not have been re-created) and could have claimed its former satillites of Tunis, Algiers, Tripoli, Egypt (with Suez), Cyprus, and maybe Malta.

And the Austrians had their eye on taking Venice away from Italy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You never know... maybe the French would have gotten the Nazis .

Though a quick war would have been interesting because there is a lot of conjecture that the reasons Fascism and Communism became so successful is because the troops lived through the horrors of war for 4 years and saw how little the individual actually mattered.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Lancer
How would France have survived? Do you think the Germans would simply leave once again? Maybe they would leave a portion, not unlike Vichy.

I don't think France would have been overrun in your hypothetical any more than Germany was overrun historically. There would have been peace talks. France would have probably had to give back the provinces of Alsace and Lorraine that it took from Germany after the Franco-Prussian War.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
You never know... maybe the French would have gotten the Nazis .

Hmmm, WWII with DeGaulle in the role of Hitler.

[Lonestar]

Re: Re: Re: Would the world be a better place if Germany had won WWI?

Originally posted by Lancer


Hey! America didn't abandon the Schliffen plan!

America's biggest contribution to the Allies came not from Manpower(although that was the proverbial straw) but form the oodles of money that was loaned to the Allies and the huge amount of munitions and small arms. This was especially important as France and England had been getting much of their industrial chemicals from Germany prior to WW1, and if it weren't for America picking up the slack, they would have been well and truly buggered.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
then the troops on the Eastern Front could be (and were) used in France.

Actually, because of the German general's greed, they took a huge bite out of Russia, and those troops that were supposed to head West ended up doing occupation duty.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Zkribbler
then the troops on the Eastern Front could be (and were) used in France.

Actually, because of the German general's greed, they took a huge bite out of Russia, and those troops that were supposed to head West ended up doing occupation duty.

SOME of those troops were used for occupation. Most of them went West. As stated in Wikipedia:

In December, the Central Powers signed an armistice with Russia, thereby releasing troops from the eastern front for use in the west. Ironically, German troop transfers could have been greater if their territorial acquisitions had not been so dramatic. With both German reinforcements and new American troops pouring into the Western Front, the final outcome of the war was to be decided in that front. The Central Powers knew that they could not win a protracted war now that American forces were certain to be arriving in increasing numbers, but they held high hopes for a rapid offensive in the West using their reinforced troops and new infantry tactics. Furthermore, the rulers of both the Central Powers and the Allies became more fearful of the threat first raised by Ivan Bloch in 1899, that protracted industrialized war threatened social collapse and revolution throughout Europe. Both sides urgently sought a decisive, rapid victory on the Western Front because they were both fearful of collapse or stalemate.

[Lancer]

I have to punch the clock in a few but I have a question.

Did the emergence of democracy in europe depend on allied victory?