Nah,no need for that, it would be cruise warfare for both sides since the HSF is not going to risk going around the British isles to find its retreat cut by the RN, that might be just too tempting.glenn239 wrote: ↑26 Sep 2019 18:17The easiest way for the KM to avoid complications is to move the entire fleet, including the submarines, into the Baltic and keep it there. Even if the French navy attacks the German North Sea coasts. However, there is a serious downside to this procedure, and that is that the French navy can run down the German merchant marine and force it to seek shelter in neutral ports. The Germans would, of course, blame the British for this state of affairs. The other issue is, of course, Souchon and Spee, and the far seas cruisers; these cannot hide in the Baltic.
Small and large cruisers is a different thing.
The RN is a far larger, immediate and possible threat than the USN, the KM wont risk a war to sink a few ships.Right, it is precisely because the U-boats were pretty bad at identification that if they were used in the Channel or Atlantic, they'd invariably start to sink British merchant and warships by accident. The British public, you would agree, would respond poorly to this? In terms of no blockade, how could a German navy couped up in the Baltic Sea prevents the French navy from doing that? Also, you seem to be assuming that the British will relieve Germany of its supply problems by direct trade. What if they don't?Nope, you need positive identification of the warship, otherwise you risk an incident right on the Uks doorstep. No blockade no trade war.
The MN was so weak, its cruisers would be chased down and sunk in the North Sea, if they were suicidal enough to try.
No, those are shallow and restricted waters, it would be suicidal to base a fleet there so exposed to enemy action, mines alone would be a nightmare, add fast torpedo boats to that... BAD IDEA.The difficulty with Antwerp as a major HSF fleet base was that the approaches to it were by way of neutral Netherlands. But, if both Belgium and Netherlands were CP allies, then this area would make a fine fleet base. Add some heavy coastal batteries in the Pas de Calais area...Antwerp, a base that led to the channel and a bunch of minefields in time of war... the Germans never used anything bigger than a DD there IIRC.
For small subs and fast torpedo boats, nothing more, restricted waters are not for fleet ships, that is asking for be sunk.During the war Belgium was very valuable as a U-boat base against Britain, and its rail net was indispensable for operations in France, whether these be aimed at France or Britain.With France defeated and crippled Belgium has no value for Germany, much less its army.
There is simply NO NEED NOR UPSIDE for antagonizing the Dutch, Willy knew that and acted accordingly.So the stronger Germany gets the more respectful of Dutch neutrality they become? I would have guessed the opposite, actually.Yeah, they were desperate and had already thrown all caution to the wind, it was make or break for them.
Most of them in the early months, then the sinkings dropped fast, and Uboats were used and built as a response to the blockade, no blockade in this case.Actually the U-boats sank 2.6 million tons of shipping in 8 months in 1918- they were not defeated, they were neutralized long enough for the Allies to win the 100 Days. Wolfpack tactics, (ie, massed submarine attacks on the surface at night) were inevitable, and the eventual anti-dote to these - radar - was not available for decades. The biggest operational hurdle by 1918 was the mined passage at Dover forcing very long trips around Scotland to patrol areas - a bit closer to reach these from Brest!Given that the convoy beat the Uboat, French bases would have made no difference.
Exactly that! Willy LOVED to talk in the heat of the moment, then he would change his mind 5 minutes laterafter cooling off and, again, how could he justify such a war AFTER fighting one? He couldnt, he had enough trouble convincing the Reichstag as it was, and he would be VERY busy dealing with the political fallout of the war, the peace dividend with people demanding Prussia to be more democratic, expanding the franchise and other popular demands.So when the Kaiser said to Moltke on 1 August when he thought France was out, that after dealing with Russia he'd 'take the measure' of the French, what are you suggesting he meant?Which was Bertie's objection to Grey but, again, without the Russians the French are no threat by themselves, not even with the UK on tow. Germany did not want war, they knew the price to be paid in both blood and post-war social concessions that undermined the monarchy.
1805, not 1915... quite a ways...That's what the Prussians thought in 1805 with Napoleon!One war was enough, and there was no chance in hell of convincing the German people of attacking a France that had remained neutral during the war... they would have to be content with Brest-Litovks and no Versailles II.
Yeah, they would be waiting, you can only gain from that, you offer help and prepare to move, move in once accepted while basking in the glow of the savior...The Germans are not waiting for any request before moving. And what of Liege? The Germans will want to garrison it and will need the Belgians out. They will not risk operations in the direction of Brussels or Antwerp without their LOC being German controlled and garrisoned.Why would Belgium delay its request for assistance? It would come before any German move.
Liege is Belgian, they can kept it, no need to harass the ally and their rear would be covered by their own troops.
No, the Germans would be there at Belgium's request, you gain PR points that way and get to shout it to the world.The Germans would be in Belgium because the French were there. Whether Belgium had or had not requested anything was immaterial. They are not helping Belgium. Further, if the Belgians did not agree to surrender Liege to the Germans, they would bring up the Krupps and Skodas and that would be that, right?Germany is there at Belgium's request, on what legal grounds could the UK ask for that? On top of FAILING to uphold a treaty it signed?
Nope, no need to take Liege from the ally.