StarDestroyer.Net BBS

The alliance between revanchist France and Britain might get the Germans to look to America for an alliance of their own. Given that a revanchist Britain would be throwing its weight around in places like South America (Britain had substantial business interests there), even the most diehard America Firster would have to respond to that.

Stas Bush wrote:

The difference is that unless the German leadership in the new super-Reich are complete and utter fucktards, a reduced France and/or Russia will not be anything approximating the kind of threat Nazi Germany was to the Allies.

Really? Russia - of course not, not with the burden of reparations and Tsar debt to pay. But France? It's an industrial powerhouse. And Britain as well.

Revanchism would be a dream of the right, which only the lunatic fringe would attempt to put into practice. And if such a group managed to get into power (which is rather unlikely), the Reich could still land on them or - in a worst-case scenario - contain it with a much lesser effort than what our WWII demanded.

Um... "The difference is that unless the Anglo-French leadership in the Entente are complete and utter fucktards, a reduced Germany and/or Italy would not be anything approximating the kind of threat Franco-Anglo-Fascists represented to the Reich. Revanchism would be a dream of the right, which only the lunatic fringe would attempt to put into practice. And if such a group managed to get into power (which is rather unlikely), the Anglo-French would still land on them - or in a worst-case scenario, contain it with a much lesser effort than our WWII demanded".

I think the difference in this version is that Germany was, between the turn of the century and the massive rise in Soviet industrialisation in the '30s, the single largest producer and economy in that hemisphere. Before WWI, even the United Kingdom produced only slightly more than 50% of the German output of steel and less than 70% of its iron output. Prewar Germany produced half of the world's electrical equipment. France, Russia, and the other powers were even further behind Britain.

Prewar France had only a fraction of German industry and the fighting took place almost entirely on its soil in its industrial heartland. Any land Germany decides to annex is going to be from the rich Lorraine or Flanders regions, furthering the imbalance. Germany also had twice France's population until after WW2.

A Franco-British alliance evens the scales, but this still doesn't seem to be quite as bad as in OTL. Unless Germany annexes Kent or something else absurd like that, the worst the British stand to lose is some territory in Africa, which puts them not terribly much worse than they were in OTL with their large post-war debt, so revanchist sentiment of such magnitude as to produce a political climate like Nazi Germany seems unlikely. And even if France does round up a load of allies, we're dealing with a timeline where Germany stood against almost all of Europe just recently and won. Short of bringing in Austria (or its fragments, should it disintegrate in this timeline, too), it's hard to imagine that alliance being able to bring down Germany, especially with France and Russia weaker this round than the previous and Germany stronger.

The ultimate idea here is, I think, that a great continent-wrecking war would require all of Europe to go on the attack in this timeline, rather than a handful as in OTL, and thus is less likely. If France decides to go it alone or with, say, Italy or Russia, a war under those conditions should not be a terribly drawn-out affair.

Stas Bush wrote:Really? Russia - of course not, not with the burden of reparations and Tsar debt to pay. But France? It's an industrial powerhouse. And Britain as well.

France, especially once the Germans have annexed key industrial regions in the vicinity of Elsass-Lothringen and done whatever other nasty things to it they might settle for (huge reparations are a given, and you might see occupation of important cities, &c; of course, such occupations might be ceased with time, like our timeline's Rhineland demilitarisation, but they will certainly be an impediment in between), is no match for Germany in terms of population or industrial might. In @, Germany was the single greatest European economy, and that it won in the West at all in 1940 was due to an outstanding combination of luck and innovative tactics (the French armed forces matched the Wehrmacht in most key aspects in numbers, and their materiel was often as good as, if not better than, that of the Germans). This when Hitler had rushed his rearmament to such a degree that the German economy was essentially on war footing in '38-39 already. France cannot hope to match the military the Nazis built if they start from scratch (I find it unlikely that a German-imposed peace would go easier on the French than Versailles did on the Germans - see Brest-Litovsk), and the enemy they contend with is also larger.

As for Britain, any expeditionary force they can muster will be substantially smaller than the army of a continental power, and they also have the naval dimension to consider. Their economic potential, while greater than that of France, is substantially smaller than Germany's. Additionally, as Jogurt noted, they are likely to be much less revanchist; Germany cannot impose the same kind of humiliating peace on them (in anything but the very most outlandish of scenarios, they will still control the seas by the end of the war, and be treated accordingly).

Who else joins the revanchist Entente powers? Italy, perhaps, after Austria-Hungary reannexes Venice, but they are the weakest of the European great powers. Otherwise, that would be pretty much all of the powers listed (Russia will not be a very beneficial ally for France, without Ukraine and the Caucasus and in the hands of rabid reactionaries, and A-H will side with Germany in any but the strangest line-ups). In a scenario of Central Powers vs Entente, I simply cannot see a drawn-out war of the magnitude of our WWII. Unless somehow America goes fascist as well and jumps on the bandwagon, but that is even more unlikely.

Um... "The difference is that unless the Anglo-French leadership in the Entente are complete and utter fucktards, a reduced Germany and/or Italy would not be anything approximating the kind of threat Franco-Anglo-Fascists represented to the Reich. Revanchism would be a dream of the right, which only the lunatic fringe would attempt to put into practice. And if such a group managed to get into power (which is rather unlikely), the Anglo-French would still land on them - or in a worst-case scenario, contain it with a much lesser effort than our WWII demanded".

First, this appreciates the difficulty of the Nazis getting into power; that was by no means a given in @, and once again depended a lot on luck. Much more likely for Germany was a more conservative military dictatorship. Such a leadership would most likely not force rearmament at the pace the Nazis did, thus giving their enemies time to reciprocate.

Second, we have the industrial disparity between the factions. The victorious Kaiserreich will be much stronger than in @, and its enemies weaker, both comparatively and in absolute terms.

Why are we discussing the pre-war standing of those powers? The WWI led to massive industrial expansion in all nations, Entente and Germany alike.

If you would show that Germany's industrial and economic potential by the year 1918 was vastly outmatching that of the Entente, I could belive you that Germany would have an easier time to clamp down on other nations later down the road. But if not, how does this follow?

Remember, Germany suffered enormous economic damage as a result of WWI, and still under Hitler it rose to become an industrial giant capable of challenging the Entente nations. Why France and Britain, which suffer economic damage in our scenario, if they go batshit militaristic, cannot achieve the same? A less industrialized nation, the USSR, did it. It's ridiculous to think a solid fascist/nationalist industrial France and Britain alliance would not be a threat on the order of magnitude of RL Fascist Germany.

Consider that in 1917, Germany did 15,7% of world's industrial production, but Britain did 14% and France - 6,4%. Even without Russia, that's 20,4% versus 15,7%. If you factor in Russia, it's ~24% versus 15,7% percent.

In 1919, Germany's industrial production was reduced to 57% of war level. That's pretty severe. It still managed to rise to become the industrial giant and start WWII.

Even moreso with our situation, where only France (which is anyway more like Britain's platzdarm) suffers - it's unlikely Germany could force a de-industrialization of Britain. A more revanchist and militaristic British Empire? You bet that's a very serious threat.

There almost totally different, though. France had already been on a downward decline, economically and demographically, compared to Germany since before the war; the war only exacerbated this. It might have damaged Germany badly but it fucked up France even more - 75% casualty rate amongst mobilised troops, huge swathes of the country devastated and vast amounts of funds expended. Had Germany gone ahead with its postwar plans - which AFAIK consisted of annexing most of the area that was fought over - France wouldn't be much of a threat for a while to come.

Britain could be different, but I doubt it. The Empire was a source of revenue and little more; even in 1941 Britain was resisting moving aircraft factories to Australia, for example, because of the effect it would have on British jobs! Nevermind the country was in its most desperate straits in 400 years. However that revenue had to protect it; Britain is always going to need to maintain a large fleet, which cuts into the size of any army or air force built up to fight Germany on its home turf.

In RL, France did a 77% boost of industrial production in 1918-1929. Yeah, our reality is heavier on France, but come on. It's still a major industrial power.

Moreover, Britain does perform on par with Germany even in 1918. Considering neither nation could substantially damage each other's industrial potency, Britain will likewise raise production in the 1918-1929 period.

The Great Depression usually caused similar damages on European nations, so we could assume it being similar between RL and AU.