all 3 comments

[–]EthnocratArcheofuturist 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Even if Germany had won, WW1 would still have been a disaster for Europe.

[–]radicalcentristNational Centrism 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This. WW1 was just a meat grinder for wiping out White Men.

More Europeans died in a single WW1 Battle, than the entirety of the France invasion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Somme

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_France

[–]TheJamesRocket 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

JamesRocket has a prolific novel(50k) words on how Germany could've won ww1, this is a smaller tribute to it.

WW2, not WW1. I appreciate the tribute. I'll provide some feedback on your post.

In this scenario, Germany does the inverse of the Schlieffen plan. In our timeline, Germany mobilized 10 field armies in 1914 and deployed 9 of them against France.

In this timeline, it would deploy of them against Russia, 1 against Serbia and 2 of them against France.

Ah, the old 'East First' strategy. There is a thread on that very topic over at AxisHistoryForum, if you are interested.

In the grand scheme of things, Germany probably had a better chance of knocking Russia out of the war than they did of defeating France. It must be kept in mind that their spectacular victory at the battle of Tannenberg (and then the battle of the Masurian lakes) was achieved with just one army. If the Germans had sent six or seven armys against the Russians, they would have been able to inflict really devastating blows. It would have looked alot like Operation Barbarossa, except with cavalry instead of tanks.

Austria would go to war with Serbia, Russia would declare war on Austria, Germany would declare war on Russia and France would come to Russia’s aid. However, without an invasion of Belgium, Britain doesn’t have an excuse to enter the war right away.

This is a smart idea. Deprive Britain of their casus belle. Keep them out of the war a few extra months. They won't be able to blockade Germany or Austria-Hungary, or send the BEF to aid France.

To garner international sympathy and to gain an additional source of manpower, the Kaiser terms the war as ‘’the war of Polish liberation”

Would he really do that, though? And what would the German people think about his claim? They were rather prejudiced against the Poles.

Austria-Hungary meanwhile would blockade and interdict the French in the Mediterranean.

They could only do this if the French sent the majority of their fleet against the Germans, leaving the few remaining ships to deal with the Austro-Hungarians.

However, in this time, the Germans are able to intervene in 1914 rather than in 1915. Bolstered by a further 150,000 German troops, the Austrians inflict lighting defeat on Serbia and knock it out of the war in 3 months.

Another smart idea. The Serbian campaign was a quagmire that went on too long, drawing in too many Austro-Hungarian troops that were needed against Russia. Removing that distraction early on will pay significant dividends for the Central Powers.

A massive double pincer operation is launched against the Russian imperial army in Poland. Three German armies, one from Poznan, one from Danzig, and another from Silesia attack the Russians head-on and pin them in place.

Two armies attack out from Krakow and cross the Vistula River in the south just west of Lwow and another two armies strike out from East Prussia and pierce the Vistula in the north, just east of Bialystok.

The Pincers meet 30 km south of Brezsck and trap the three Russian armies west of the Vistula River.

God damn. Remember what I said about this turning into Operation Barbarossa? This is what the Germans could have done if they had a few extra armys to throw against the Russians. It would have been total annihilation.