Jump to content


Photo

What If: Kaiser Willie Dies In 1909?


  • Please log in to reply
322 replies to this topic

#281 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,355 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 0802 AM

Thanks, thats very interesting. I looked in vain to see if they had the Kraus book on archive.org but it came up a blank. Im guessing it never made it into English?

 

Ive been watching Simon Seebag Montifiore's recent series on the Hapsburg's, and it was interesting to reflect how most of their territory was made from successful marriages, not military success. In fact most of their military success seemed to come when they had other nations, such as Poland, doing their fighting for them. There doesnt seem to me to be the kind of long established military tradition compared perhaps to the Prussians, or am I being unfair here?


  • 0

#282 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,918 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 0910 AM

It was translated to English in the 1930s when it was published. There was no post-WW2 editions in pretty much any language. :(


  • 0

#283 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,355 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 0932 AM

Ok, ill keep looking then. Thanks.


  • 0

#284 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 0945 AM

 

Was Serbia a villain or were they so inept that they could not control the crazies in their midst?

I have noted earlier that Apis could not be controlled and none that could maybe stop it did not actually know what he really planned to do.

Glenn is however ignoring root of the Serbian - Austrian problems, "Cannon crysis" aka "Pigs war", where Austria tried to keep Serbia in the semi-colonial state and prevent Serbia from acquiring weapons from anyone other than them, even if their weapons (Mannlicher 1888 and 8cm FK.05) were inferior to the ones chosen by Serbia. Plus Austrian annexation of Bosnia, which was a pure colonial move.

 

 

We haven't talked about the Pig War.  Serbia wound up buying its weapons elsewhere, did it not?  So Austria lost that one.

 

Austria had administered Bosnia for decades prior to its annexation in 1908.  This annexation was wrong, but hardly out of step with international practice at the time - the British and French empires were pretty big.  What Austria's mistake was, was to be despised by the Entente.  Didn't Austria know that only Empires friendly or submissive to the Entente had permission to annex territory?  


  • 0

#285 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,971 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 1001 AM

They could never be friendly to the Entente, Russia had key interest of widening Slavic influence and control in Balkans, including territories controlled by AH and not just Bosnia.


  • 0

#286 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 1204 PM

Yes, Austria was in a fairly unique position in that it was not to be allowed to be on good terms with the Entente, even to the point of insult; the French and British DOW's on Austria were total fabrications and the Anglo-French naval accord was based on the utterly absurd proposition that the tiny Austrian fleet rose to the level of an adversary of the Royal Navy in which the British - for reasons not explain in over 100 years - somehow required French protection.  Had the Central Powers known in 1905 what they knew in 1914 of the contempt the Entente would hold for Austria in particular, they'd probably have finished the Russians during the 1904-1905 war.

 

And yet, for all the refuse heaped upon this ramshackle from the 1700's, it proved surprisingly resilient to being murdered, perhaps foreshadowing a deep inner strength of the similar but modern EU.


Edited by glenn239, 28 November 2019 - 1210 PM.

  • 0

#287 Markus Becker

Markus Becker

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,067 posts

Posted 28 November 2019 - 1341 PM

Russia first would be an opportunity for rectification of the status quo created by the articles the Treaty of Portsmouth in Japan's favor for generations. That Britain would be obligated by treaty to align with Japan should France make any threatening moves to the contrary would be reassuring in various ways.


Right, Japan had some unfinished business with them too.

Would that have convinced them to enter negotiations once it's clear that the French effort in the west has failed?
  • 0

#288 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,502 posts

Posted 29 November 2019 - 1125 AM

That unfinished business continues to this day.

 

A Russia-first approach would not guarantee Japanese participation, but it would be prudent for the German diplomatic corps to inquire about the possibility before the British enter the fray. The alliance with Britain will tie Japan's hands afterward.

 

France is welcome to take any actions against Japan that it sees fit in this time frame. Doing so will ensure that French influence in the Pacific will be no more for generations.


  • 0

#289 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,355 posts

Posted 29 November 2019 - 1128 AM

Does Japan have the ability to take on and defeat the French fleet in the Pacific in this period?


  • 0

#290 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 29 November 2019 - 1204 PM

Allied to Germany and with Britain neutral, I'd say yes.  But if either the US or Britain balks at the idea, then no.


  • 0

#291 Nobu

Nobu

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,502 posts

Posted 29 November 2019 - 1245 PM

Allied is strong terminology with regard to Germany in this episode. Co-belligerent will do, at least until Russia cedes its Far East to Japan as the cost of playing arbiter of power in Eastern Europe.


  • 0

#292 seahawk

seahawk

    military loving leftist peace monkey

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,971 posts

Posted 29 November 2019 - 1313 PM

Allied to Germany and with Britain neutral, I'd say yes.  But if either the US or Britain balks at the idea, then no.

 

But that would be another reason for the UK to not stay neutral. Not only must they fear Germany dominating Europe, they would also face a rising power in Asia-


  • 0

#293 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 30 November 2019 - 1020 AM

 

Allied to Germany and with Britain neutral, I'd say yes.  But if either the US or Britain balks at the idea, then no.

 

But that would be another reason for the UK to not stay neutral. Not only must they fear Germany dominating Europe, they would also face a rising power in Asia-

 

 

Absolutely correct.  The geopolitical situation for Britain was so brittle that I find any possibility of neutrality in a Franco-German conflict to be an impossible idea.   Had Britain actually remained neutral, not just Japan, but Italy, Bulgaria, Romania and the Ottomans could have rapidly piled on against Serbia and Russia, and maybe France.  The reason why Moltke invaded Belgium so quickly is because the political calculus of the Entente policy seemed so straightforward the German army just didn't believe that Britain would do anything but talk Germany in circles while the Russians mobilized. 


  • 0

#294 Murph

Murph

    Hierophant Lord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 30 November 2019 - 1021 AM

Does Japan have the ability to take on and defeat the French fleet in the Pacific in this period?

I would think that they did.  The IJN was well equipped with pre and post dreadnought warships.  


  • 0

#295 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,355 posts

Posted 30 November 2019 - 1037 AM

I know, but the French dont seem to be that badly off. More to the point, they had logistic bases all the way to the Pacific, something the Russians did not have and hence the came a cropper.

 

Has anyone got a source for what they actually had in 1914?


  • 0

#296 Murph

Murph

    Hierophant Lord

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,318 posts

Posted 30 November 2019 - 1445 PM

This is as good as I could find on the IJN: https://en.wikipedia...avy#Battleships


  • 0

#297 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,586 posts

Posted 30 November 2019 - 2016 PM

In 1914, France might be the stronger. Their 4 Courbet-class Dreadnoughts look solid and match or seem better than Japan's top line up of Dreadnoughts (2 Satsuma and 2 Kawachi). The British designed Kongo class of 4 Battlecruisers look really strong though. While on the French side were the successor to the Courbet-class, the Bretagne-class of which there were 3 coming about.

If France sided more so with Russia, I'd imagine the British would retain backing Japan. In that case, France probably be unwilling to dispatch a large portion of her total fleet to the Pacific, leaving assets more closer to French home at the mercy of the British navy. So Japan should be able to have the advantage in capital ships in a Pacific thearter.

Well just some initial looking into. I don't know much about dreadnoughts and WW1 detials in all honesty.

Edited by JasonJ, 30 November 2019 - 2016 PM.

  • 0

#298 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Just Another Salisbury Tourist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 56,355 posts

Posted 01 December 2019 - 0313 AM

This would be an interesting alternative history scenario, no?

 

Of course you then have the political implications of the Japanese taking Indo China. From the British perspective that is setting us up for potential problems with Malaya later.


  • 0

#299 JasonJ

JasonJ

    nonbiri

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,586 posts

Posted 01 December 2019 - 0512 AM

This would be an interesting alternative history scenario, no?
 
Of course you then have the political implications of the Japanese taking Indo China. From the British perspective that is setting us up for potential problems with Malaya later.


It wasn't Japan that wanted to end the alliance. AFAIK, it wasn't Great Britain itself either. It was the other commonwealth countries and the US that wanted that alliance broken. There is no strong enough precident up to that point of time to assume it likely that Japan would have taken the initiative to pursue ending the alliance only to then scheming to go attacking British possessions. If one wants to argue that after an unrealistic hypothetical in which Japan and france go to war in the 1910s and Japan wins getting Indochina, that the breakng of the Great Britain-Japan alliance was a good thing and should happen, then yes, there might be more friction between Japanese and British territories.

But the real interesting what if would be what if the US just stayed satisfied with its dominant control in the Pacific east of Guam (leaving the Philippines to Spain or independence) to the other side of dominance in the western Atlantic and just make do with Great Britain and Japan as they were and not go trying to break that alliance or rather just soften it a tad so that the US could feel at ease that it wouldn't get doubled team against both Great Britain and Japan?
  • 0

#300 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 5,580 posts

Posted 02 December 2019 - 0857 AM

I know, but the French dont seem to be that badly off. More to the point, they had logistic bases all the way to the Pacific, something the Russians did not have and hence the came a cropper.

 

Has anyone got a source for what they actually had in 1914?

 

It's not a question of what the French had in total (4 battleships, 6 semi-battleships, plus a host of older pre-dreadnoughts and armored cruisers), but what their fleet needed to do in home waters before any surplus strength could be assigned to the Pacific.  Think of Britain's dilemma in 1940/1941 between the Atlantic, Med, and Far East.  Similar idea.


  • 0