German focus on Russia in 1914.

Discussions on alternate history, including events up to 20 years before today. Hosted by Terry Duncan.
Post Reply
User avatar
princeliberty10311517
Member
Posts: 621
Joined: 05 Jun 2009, 22:26
Location: Alexandria Virginia - DC area

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#31

Post by princeliberty10311517 » 09 Jun 2009, 21:33

Baltasar wrote:Why, how and when would Britain join the war on France's side if Germany remained defensive in the west? How would Britain justify joining in on a war against Germany, while the latter has not attacked any neutral country and is 'only' successful in the east? How would the British public opinion develop, how much effort would Britain actually throw into that conflict? Would they send the BEF or 'just' blockade German naval traffic, would it be a close blockade or would the North Sea be left to the Reich while the RN blocked the ways to the Atlantic?
I would LOVE to see the Prime Minister defending INVADING Belgium.

All along the sole justification for BEF was to keep any powerful nation from controlling the low countries ports and threatening England.

Instead unprovoked by Germany, England declares war and then invades Belgium! :roll: 8O

All the world would have sympathy with Germany. There probably would be riots in London. Certainly Ireland would revolt instead of sending troops to fight in this crazy war.

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#32

Post by Dave Bender » 09 Jun 2009, 21:50

the day Britain declares war Germany changes to the Western game plan
Why? Knocking Russia out of the war is as advantageous as knocking France out of the war. Besides which you cannot move 4 field armies and most of the German artillery stockpile from Posen to Aachen without a lot of effort.


glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#33

Post by glenn239 » 10 Jun 2009, 00:53

I would LOVE to see the Prime Minister defending INVADING Belgium.
So the hope is that the British and French will look forward to Russia being wiped out?

The Prime Minister would state that Russia’s very existence was at stake from an Austro-German war of aggression, and the west had to assist her. That Germany will use Belgium as a shield, then come around and crush France as soon as she could. The BEF goes to France and joins the attack.
The other point is, the day Britain declares war Germany changes to the Western game plan, the main reason to east first is to not have war with England in 1914.
It is too late to switch fronts. You are committed.
On the outside chance Britain declares war on Germany and really goes crazy and invades Belgium, Belgium would then be on Germany's side and the 3 German armies and the Belgium could easily hold the line of Meuse river and Alsace Lorraine.
Three smallish German armies are going to hold 5 French, 1 British and 1 Belgian army? If they don't the war is over.

With respect to the assumption that Belgium joins Germany, I did not ask about that contingency. I asked what happens if Belgium, following her international interests, joins France. What does Germany do?

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#34

Post by glenn239 » 10 Jun 2009, 01:09

One other question you have not addressed: Luxembourg. Does Germany invade Luxembourg to protect Metz, or does Germany not invade and risk that France will do so instead?

User avatar
princeliberty10311517
Member
Posts: 621
Joined: 05 Jun 2009, 22:26
Location: Alexandria Virginia - DC area

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#35

Post by princeliberty10311517 » 10 Jun 2009, 01:35

glenn239 wrote:
I would LOVE to see the Prime Minister defending INVADING Belgium.
So the hope is that the British and French will look forward to Russia being wiped out?

The Prime Minister would state that Russia’s very existence was at stake from an Austro-German war of aggression, and the west had to assist her. That Germany will use Belgium as a shield, then come around and crush France as soon as she could. The BEF goes to France and joins the attack.
The other point is, the day Britain declares war Germany changes to the Western game plan, the main reason to east first is to not have war with England in 1914.
It is too late to switch fronts. You are committed.
On the outside chance Britain declares war on Germany and really goes crazy and invades Belgium, Belgium would then be on Germany's side and the 3 German armies and the Belgium could easily hold the line of Meuse river and Alsace Lorraine.
Three smallish German armies are going to hold 5 French, 1 British and 1 Belgian army? If they don't the war is over.

With respect to the assumption that Belgium joins Germany, I did not ask about that contingency. I asked what happens if Belgium, following her international interests, joins France. What does Germany do?
Its in Belgium's interest NOT to be INVADED. Belgium did not want to join anyone. It wanted out of a war.

If Germany does not attack, Belgium is hardly going to jump in.

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#36

Post by Baltasar » 10 Jun 2009, 01:49

glenn239 wrote:
I would LOVE to see the Prime Minister defending INVADING Belgium.
So the hope is that the British and French will look forward to Russia being wiped out?

The Prime Minister would state that Russia’s very existence was at stake from an Austro-German war of aggression, and the west had to assist her. That Germany will use Belgium as a shield, then come around and crush France as soon as she could. The BEF goes to France and joins the attack.
The Prime Minister might want to explain why the very existence of Russia, which was certainly not at stake, not even in OTL, was important to Britain. In that time, wars were not fought to annex complete countries, at least not countries of the size of mother Russia. Even the Brest-Litovsk treaty of OTL 1917 did only annex a comparatively small part.
On the outside chance Britain declares war on Germany and really goes crazy and invades Belgium, Belgium would then be on Germany's side and the 3 German armies and the Belgium could easily hold the line of Meuse river and Alsace Lorraine.
Three smallish German armies are going to hold 5 French, 1 British and 1 Belgian army? If they don't the war is over.

With respect to the assumption that Belgium joins Germany, I did not ask about that contingency. I asked what happens if Belgium, following her international interests, joins France. What does Germany do?
The three and a half German armies would certainly not be smallish, especially not on a rather confined front as Alsace-Lorraine. In 1870, the regular three Prussian and allied armies totaled about 300,000 men which made the drive to Paris, plus follow up formations. The 1914 armies were rather larger and a lot better equipped.

The British 'army' was virtually not existing in 1914, at least not in a sufficient size to call it an army. The BEF would be neglectible until it would show up in force, which would take quite a while, because they didn't have conscription and the enthusiasm to join the war effort as soldiers would be a lot less, because the question for the Brits would be: 'What's that got to do with us?'

The Belgian forces, while more numerous than the British, were less good equipped and would lack an actual reason to fight. The Belgian borders had been guaranteed by several nations and those borders would not be violated, at least not by the Kaiserreich. The treaties between France and Belgium always were only effective if Germany attacked Belgium, not if France attacked Germany. So, what's the reason for Belgium to join the war on France's side?

Also, WHEN would Britain and/or Belgium join on either side of the war, IF they actually would've joined in?

In any case, I would assume that the Ostaufmarschplan could be modified to release a fith army to the west as a border guard and general reserve if either the Belgians or the French try to move around the other 3 and a half armies.
One other question you have not addressed: Luxembourg. Does Germany invade Luxembourg to protect Metz, or does Germany not invade and risk that France will do so instead?
The politics would be worth the risk. If France really violated the borders of a neutral state, that'd swing public support even more to Germany. Besides, as that country isn't too big, it'd borders could probably be covered as well.

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Release a fith army to the west

#37

Post by Dave Bender » 10 Jun 2009, 02:51

http://home.comcast.net/~jcviser/index. ... /corps.htm
Germans had formed 47 regular, reserve, and cavalry corps. Eight more reserve corps and two cavalry corps were added by the end of August, followed by four more reserve corps standing up in late December
The 8 German reserve infantry corps formed during August 1914 will probably go to the west as reinforcements. 6 of the corps can be used to form a new field army. 2 of the corps can be used to expand 9th Army Detachment (located in the Vosges) to army strength. This gives Germany 5 field armies in the west plus the 5 in the east during September 1914.

Bear in mind that most of the heavy artillery and all of the siege artillery will be in the east. Plus additional pioneers, RR construction units, supply units etc. That's what gives the eastern armies their offensive punch. Even though Germany now has 5 armies in the west they must remain on the defensive in support of the border fortifications.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#38

Post by glenn239 » 10 Jun 2009, 19:24

There was no clear answer given on Luxembourg. Does Germany invade Luxembourg, or does Germany allow France to take it?

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#39

Post by glenn239 » 10 Jun 2009, 19:25

The Prime Minister might want to explain why the very existence of Russia, which was certainly not at stake, not even in OTL, was important to Britain.
You clearly implied that not invading Belgium would mean that Germany would be shorn of the mantle of the aggressor. As if you anticipate Britain to view 2.5 million Austrian and German troops invading Russia as some form of picnic. I am stating that there is no basis for such misplaced optimism; Germany will be accused of a war of aggression upon Russia, and Britain and France would attack Germany from the west as Russia’s ally on that account.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#40

Post by glenn239 » 10 Jun 2009, 19:32

Its in Belgium's interest NOT to be INVADED. Belgium did not want to join anyone. It wanted out of a war.
Well, Belgium might have wanted a 16” schlong, and that wasn’t gonna happen either.

If Germany does not invade Belgium, then France will. If Belgium resists France and Britain, then Belgium has just lost her entire world empire (which exists at the pleasure of the Royal Navy), her world trade (which also exists at the pleasure of the Royal Navy), and her territorial integrity (which is something the Entente will not uphold if Belgium makes war against them). If Belgium finds some excuse to support France, then Belgium will retain her African empire, will retain her world trade, and will retain her territorial integrity.
In any case, I would assume that the Ostaufmarschplan could be modified to release a fith army to the west
If you water down the eastern deployment, then you’ve accomplished nothing. Now, you’ve surrendered the western strategic glacis. The front line is just in front of the Rhine, and your remaining iron-ore supply is now at the mercy of the Royal Navy. (Perhaps the plan is to ask the French to sell the iron-ore that Germany needs to make shells to fire at the French?) What’s more, you’ve united the peasant's hearts and souls to the defense of Mother Russia.

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#41

Post by Baltasar » 10 Jun 2009, 20:10

glenn239 wrote:
The Prime Minister might want to explain why the very existence of Russia, which was certainly not at stake, not even in OTL, was important to Britain.
You clearly implied that not invading Belgium would mean that Germany would be shorn of the mantle of the aggressor. As if you anticipate Britain to view 2.5 million Austrian and German troops invading Russia as some form of picnic. I am stating that there is no basis for such misplaced optimism; Germany will be accused of a war of aggression upon Russia, and Britain and France would attack Germany from the west as Russia’s ally on that account.
Britain had no obligation to defend Russia in contrast to France. in OTL, Germay declared war on Russia following the Russian general mobilization. According to the mutual defense treaty between Russia and France, France declared war on Germany because of that. Britain officially joined in because of the violation of the Belgian border.

Assuming that Germany doesn't violate any neutral border (that obviously includes Luxembourg), Britain has no obligation to enter a war between the four major powers on the continent. It has even less obligation (read: official reason) to enter the war on France's side if the latter invades neutral Luxembourg. Of course, Germany is still the 'agressor' for declaring war on Russia, but liberal parts in Britain would consider that an act of self defense the Kaisers part. In any case, the immediate reason for declaring war on Germany would not exist as there was no defense treaty between Russia and Britain and France was the one who declared war on Germany.

I also fail to see how Russias existence would be at stake, no matter what numbers of Austrian-German troops marched towards St.Petersburg. After all, Germany had offered very moderate conditions for France in 1870 and the German armies only started bombarding Paris when the French continued to fight even without any hope of succeeding in breaking the siege or even throw the German armies out of France.

Also, as long as Britain stays neutral, international trade routes would be available to Germany. The French navy was certainly a threat, but the Kriegsmarine was numerous also.
Last edited by Baltasar on 10 Jun 2009, 20:23, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Baltasar
Member
Posts: 4614
Joined: 21 Feb 2003, 16:56
Location: Germany

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#42

Post by Baltasar » 10 Jun 2009, 20:16

glenn239 wrote:
Its in Belgium's interest NOT to be INVADED. Belgium did not want to join anyone. It wanted out of a war.
Well, Belgium might have wanted a 16” schlong, and that wasn’t gonna happen either.

If Germany does not invade Belgium, then France will. If Belgium resists France and Britain, then Belgium has just lost her entire world empire (which exists at the pleasure of the Royal Navy), her world trade (which also exists at the pleasure of the Royal Navy), and her territorial integrity (which is something the Entente will not uphold if Belgium makes war against them). If Belgium finds some excuse to support France, then Belgium will retain her African empire, will retain her world trade, and will retain her territorial integrity.
I'm still interested in how the liberal and freedom loving French would justify invading a neutral country. Moreover, I'm even more interested in how the Belgians would make an alliance with the very people who invaded them. Leaving aside the strategical political implications, I don't believe either of these things could've happened. If there had been any chance of French troops marching through Belgium, the Belgians would have to join the French alliance first. And then they knew their country would be the battlefield for France and Germany.
In any case, I would assume that the Ostaufmarschplan could be modified to release a fith army to the west
If you water down the eastern deployment, then you’ve accomplished nothing. Now, you’ve surrendered the western strategic glacis. The front line is just in front of the Rhine, and your remaining iron-ore supply is now at the mercy of the Royal Navy. (Perhaps the plan is to ask the French to sell the iron-ore that Germany needs to make shells to fire at the French?) What’s more, you’ve united the peasant's hearts and souls to the defense of Mother Russia.
As Dave has pointed out, it's not neccessary to water the Ostaufmarsch down. Iron can still be importet via Sweden and Alsace Lorraine has Iron deposits of her own. In OTL, the ammunition shortages showed up especially on the Allied side, even though they had so much more supplies available.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#43

Post by glenn239 » 11 Jun 2009, 03:40

I'm still interested in how the liberal and freedom loving French would justify invading a neutral country.
Because Russia falls if they don’t.
I also fail to see how Russias existence would be at stake, no matter what numbers of Austrian-German troops marched towards St.Petersburg.
Therefore your position is that the occupation of the ethnically diverse and seething Russian Empire could not lead to a sovereign Poland, Baltic States, Finland, and Ukraine. I see no basis to support your thinking; independence across the Russian empire for the minorities is precisely what occurs when Russia falls. So the first assumption of this plan is false; the west does not diminish its accusations of German aggression, it simply transfers them to Russia and states that the object of this unjust war is the destruction of Russia and Serbia.

glenn239
Member
Posts: 5862
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 02:20
Location: Ontario, Canada

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#44

Post by glenn239 » 11 Jun 2009, 03:44

Assuming that Germany doesn't violate any neutral border (that obviously includes Luxembourg), Britain has no obligation to enter a war between the four major powers on the continent.
Britain was motivated to maintain the balance of power. If you're thinking that upholding Luxembourg's rights mattered more to London than stopping Germany from becoming hegemon, guess again.
Iron can still be imported via Sweden and Alsace Lorraine has Iron deposits of her own.
Imports from Sweden can be interdicted, so these are no substitute for the French fields that have just been foolishly given up. The deposits along the Franco-German border were mostly on the French side.

So the one certainty of this plan is that it offers a unique way to lose the war that the historical Germans did not discover.
Leaving aside the strategical political implications, I don't believe either of these things could've happened.
Pie-in-the-sky assumptions are no substitute for avoiding hard calculations. A plan that refuses to accommodate the worst-case scenario on the basis of a personal hunch is worthless.

The assumption to an eastern strategy relies upon the certain neutrality of Great Britain. If this occurs then Germany can march east. If it does not occur, then Germany must attack in the west. So the obvious way forward was for Germany to approach Great Britain long before any war and offer everything under the sun to secure her certain neutrality. If a deal is struck, then an eastern plan becomes viable. If a deal is not struck, then the Schlieffen Plan must be implemented.

Dave Bender
Member
Posts: 3533
Joined: 24 Apr 2006, 22:21
Location: Michigan U.S.A.

Re: German focus on Russia in 1914.

#45

Post by Dave Bender » 11 Jun 2009, 04:16

If Belgium finds some excuse to support France, then Belgium will retain her African empire, will retain her world trade, and will retain her territorial integrity.
If Belgium finds some excuse to support France and yet France loses the war then the Belgium mother country is toast. That's a lot worse then losing some African colonies.

On the other hand Belgium can remain neutral and hope that her modern fortress system plus American diplomatic support will provide an adequate deterrence to Anglo-French aggression. Historically there was a lot of American sympathy for Belgium so that is no small matter.

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/ ... /MapII.jpg
The Luxembourg rail junction is of vital importance for supporting the 3 army French advance across the Ardennes. Therefore Germany will still occupy it as part of their defensive strategy in the west.

Post Reply

Return to “What if”