What if.. Britain decided to join Germany in WW1

[Caleonia]

What happens? Germany and Britain win. No contest. It’s likely that the war would’ve ended before the US would get involved if that happened.

Is it likely? Hell no, because Britain has nothing to gain by siding with a Reich hungry for influence and Prussia had squabbles with Britain here and there before Germany ever became a reality.

The future effects? Well, France and Russia would’ve likely been thrown into the state of mid-20s Germany, and its possible communism still would’ve taken over Russia. Hitler likely never would’ve happened and same goes for WW2, but as a result technological development is delayed and we likely wouldn’t be where we are today until the mid 2030s.

I would not have started playing NationStates in 2002, but rather NS would only come out in a few months or so

Huzzah!

And I would’ve been born in 2022 with that logic.

[Bears Armed Broadcasting Corporation]

Did you already know that Franz Ferdinand was almost killed by accident a year or two before 1914?
While on a visit to England he attended a pheasant shoot, one of the really fancy ones in which each shooter had two guns with a servant to reload them. The servant re-loading his guns slipped while passing a loaded one forwards...

[The Blaatschapen]

I would not have started playing NationStates in 2002, but rather NS would only come out in a few months or so

Huzzah!

And I would’ve been born in 2022 with that logic.

Are you a technological development?

[Caleonia]

And I would’ve been born in 2022 with that logic.

Are you a technological development?

No, I was born in 2004.

[Ethel mermania]

Umm russia defended Serbia and the germans went after them before nicki could fully mobilize his troops. We are discussing the scenario where GB joins germany and not france and russia. Any agreements between russia and Germany didnt have much effect in the war, (besides I do not recall a treaty between germany and russia regarding mutual assistance in times of war).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk

The way you phrased it made it sound like Germany would annex Russia. Ik what side Russia fought for g, lmao, I said peace treaty not alliance, most likely the treaty would just happen sooner in this scenario, but you made it sound like Germany would push into Russia proper to conquer it, even though that wasn't really their wargoal.

Sweetie, brest-litovsk ended the war between germany and russia. It wasnt before the war. It also gave germany large swaths of territory and created an effective buffer state of the Ukraine between russia and germany.

[The Blaatschapen]

Are you a technological development?

No, I was born in 2004.

Then the logic doesn't apply to you.

My point stands, NS is a technological development (dependent on things like Internet, HTML, etc.), and if technological development is delayed by 15+ years, NS would very likely also be delayed (or not exist at all).

[Page]

Did you already know that Franz Ferdinand was almost killed by accident a year or two before 1914?
While on a visit to England he attended a pheasant shoot, one of the really fancy ones in which each shooter had two guns with a servant to reload them. The servant re-loading his guns slipped while passing a loaded one forwards...

I suspect that if Franz Ferdinand was not assassinated that Austria-Hungary would have found another cause for war anyway.

[North German Realm]

Did you already know that Franz Ferdinand was almost killed by accident a year or two before 1914?
While on a visit to England he attended a pheasant shoot, one of the really fancy ones in which each shooter had two guns with a servant to reload them. The servant re-loading his guns slipped while passing a loaded one forwards...

I suspect that if Franz Ferdinand was not assassinated that Austria-Hungary would have found another cause for war anyway.

I mean, the war was inevitable, but given Austria-Hungary was the victim in the crisis that triggered the July Crisis, I resent that comment.

[Medwind]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Brest-Litovsk

The way you phrased it made it sound like Germany would annex Russia. Ik what side Russia fought for g, lmao, I said peace treaty not alliance, most likely the treaty would just happen sooner in this scenario, but you made it sound like Germany would push into Russia proper to conquer it, even though that wasn't really their wargoal.

Sweetie, brest-litovsk ended the war between germany and russia. It wasnt before the war. It also gave germany large swaths of territory and created an effective buffer state of the Ukraine between russia and germany.

Bruh, work on your reading comprehension and stop being condescending. YOU are the one with a misunderstanding here.

[United Muscovite Nations]

They wouldn't because them not liking Germany isn't why they joined the war against Germany.

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

The 20th Century was a quirk in that after fighting the French for centuries Britain joined up and fought with the French in WW1 and WW2 making Germany the perceived baddies of British culture.

Simply, they forgot it's the French they don't like, not the Germans. Britain and Germany share a lot, from language roots to a love of beer and football, the original name of the Royal family is House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. George and Wilhelm were cousins.

The French have always been a pain in the ass.

So, for one, I imagine WW2 wouldn't have happened. One might argue the Communist Revolution would still happen although the White army may have had better success reinstating the Royal family if it was a strong GB and Germany.

Ultimately we wouldn't have this stupid Brexit and Europe as a whole might be a lot stronger.

However there's dozens of history buffs on this site with fancy History degrees and etc., so what think ye!

Crimean war? Boxer rebellion? Second opium war? Britain and France had a track record of working together by ww1. Besides British foreign policy has always been

1: prevent continental hegemony

2: (?)

3: profit

[Ethel mermania]

Sweetie, brest-litovsk ended the war between germany and russia. It wasnt before the war. It also gave germany large swaths of territory and created an effective buffer state of the Ukraine between russia and germany.

Bruh, work on your reading comprehension and stop being condescending. YOU are the one with a misunderstanding here.

I am not the one who used brest-litovsk as a pre war peace treaty between Germany and russia.

[Medwind]

Bruh, work on your reading comprehension and stop being condescending. YOU are the one with a misunderstanding here.

I am not the one who used brest-litovsk as a pre war peace treaty between Germany and russia.

I didn't, I was operating under the assumption that the same treaty would be in made in this situation, as in rl.

[Ethel mermania]

I am not the one who used brest-litovsk as a pre war peace treaty between Germany and russia.

I didn't, I was operating under the assumption that the same treaty would be in made in this situation, as in rl.

Why? without Britain on France's side, Germany wouldnt need the eastern front troops for the Michael offensive. Though I would agree germany wasnt after the destruction of the russian empire, just the curtailing it as a threat on its eastern border.

[Great Ingen]

I can't imagine america joining on the German side against France. If we did get involved it would probobly be 1812 2 trench warfare boogaloo.

Actually, both in WWI and WWII part of the reason for America's late entry was pro-German sentiment. America had (and still has) a huge ethnic German population, and even as late as the Civil War the Union was fielding regiments whose primary language was German. Many of the major American breweries (Pabst, Miller, Anheuser-Busch) were founded by Germans. If the First World War had been England and Germany against France, I cannot imagine any American politician risking the displeasure of the combined Anglo-German population of the turn-of-the-century USA.

Besides, if Great Britain had sided with Germany in WWI, there would not even have been a need for America to enter the First World War. France alone could not have resisted the entire Royal Navy, with the ability to land troops basically wherever it pleased, nor could it have resisted the German offensives without the support of the British Army.

The real question would be how Britain and Germany would come to be aligned. Germany's new push to build a fleet threatened British naval dominance which had been supreme for more than a century. Germany had also attempted to thwart French colonial ambitions in Morocco. Britain and France had previously signed the Entente Cordiale in order to resolve any territorial disputes between themselves, and so Britain, a colonial power itself, had sided with France in order to uphold France's territorial rights as outlined by the Entente. This further alienated Germany and proved the validity of the Entente between Britain and France.

Realistically, Germany would have to have reached out to Britain a long time before the start of WWI, and not have begun its campaign of fleet-building, in order to have any chance of swaying Britain to its side in the First World War.

[Genivaria]

I suspect that if Franz Ferdinand was not assassinated that Austria-Hungary would have found another cause for war anyway.

I mean, the war was inevitable, but given Austria-Hungary was the victim in the crisis that triggered the July Crisis, I resent that comment.

Resent away, WW1 was Austria's war.

[Genivaria]

I think the big point of tension was the German construction of a High Seas Fleet that challenged the Royal Navy. If the Germans acquiesced to the British demands that they halt said construction than an alliance would've been possible.

[Medwind]

I didn't, I was operating under the assumption that the same treaty would be in made in this situation, as in rl.

Why? without Britain on France's side, Germany wouldnt need the eastern front troops for the Michael offensive. Though I would agree germany wasnt after the destruction of the russian empire, just the curtailing it as a threat on its eastern border.

Because it would be unnecessary to attempt to conquer Russia? Because invading Russia en mass was nor a part of German agenda, and a favorable peace treaty would be preferable to an extension of the war, and all the many issues that a major offensive campaign in Russia would face? Idk, maybe I'm goofy but it seems likely the treaty would still happen, thus Russia would not be destroyed, as you put it.

[Ethel mermania]

Why? without Britain on France's side, Germany wouldnt need the eastern front troops for the Michael offensive. Though I would agree germany wasnt after the destruction of the russian empire, just the curtailing it as a threat on its eastern border.

Because it would be unnecessary to attempt to conquer Russia? Because invading Russia en mass was nor a part of German agenda, and a favorable peace treaty would be preferable to an extension of the war, and all the many issues that a major offensive campaign in Russia would face? Idk, maybe I'm goofy but it seems likely the treaty would still happen, thus Russia would not be destroyed, as you put it.

Again the hypothetical is pre war not the end of the war. There WAS no treaty between russia and germany. You cant use it in a hypothetical about 1914.

Russia was defending the slavs of Serbia, the germans Austria-hugry's prerogative to get revenge a throughly investigate the assassination. If Russia didnt see itself as the saviour of the orthodox Balkans, and support Serbia in refusing Austrian demands, world war 1 does not happen.

[Genivaria]

Because it would be unnecessary to attempt to conquer Russia? Because invading Russia en mass was nor a part of German agenda, and a favorable peace treaty would be preferable to an extension of the war, and all the many issues that a major offensive campaign in Russia would face? Idk, maybe I'm goofy but it seems likely the treaty would still happen, thus Russia would not be destroyed, as you put it.

Again the hypothetical is pre war not the end of the war. There WAS no treaty between russia and germany. You cant use it in a hypothetical about 1914.

Russia was defending the slavs of Serbia, the germans Austria-hugry's prerogative to a get revenge for the assassination. If Russia didnt see itself as the saviour of the orthodox Balkans, and support Serbia in refusing Austrian demands, world war 1 does not happen.

Honestly the German Empire should've annexed Austria before and allowed Balkan Slavs to be a puppet federation under them.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Lies, they had among the finest hats in the country.

They weren't particularly hated though.

Nobody considers the Pickelhaube "fine."

I consider it "sexy".

[GLORIOUS FALGSC]

Lies, they had among the finest hats in the country.

They weren't particularly hated though.

Nobody considers the Pickelhaube "fine."

did

you just insult

DER VATERLAND

[Medwind]

Because it would be unnecessary to attempt to conquer Russia? Because invading Russia en mass was nor a part of German agenda, and a favorable peace treaty would be preferable to an extension of the war, and all the many issues that a major offensive campaign in Russia would face? Idk, maybe I'm goofy but it seems likely the treaty would still happen, thus Russia would not be destroyed, as you put it.

Again the hypothetical is pre war not the end of the war. There WAS no treaty between russia and germany. You cant use it in a hypothetical about 1914.

Russia was defending the slavs of Serbia, the germans Austria-hugry's prerogative to get revenge a throughly investigate the assassination. If Russia didnt see itself as the saviour of the orthodox Balkans, and support Serbia in refusing Austrian demands, world war 1 does not happen.

I've already explained that most likely it would still happen regardless... so, yes, the original message was slightly incorrect, (in making the assumption that the peace treaty would still happen) it's not due to my misunderstanding of dates though lmao. I don't see your point in stating information I already know, and has never been in question over and over again. I don't understand why you're failing to get this. Germany still would have made the peace treaty, most likely, Russia would still survive just like irl, so therefore you're original statement was also most likely incorrect, although it's hypothetical so who's to say.

[Napkizemlja]

I think we can safely assume an Axis victory, in this case.

There are too many threads to try and tie together to say much of anything far-reaching, though. It's hard to say, for instance, if America would even join this war. And I couldn't guess what the impact of any answer to that question is. Japan probably would, but on the side of the Axis, and would want French colonies in the Pacific, just like the wanted German ones in our history. Is Belgium in this war? Italy? Whose side are they on?

The Axis powers didn't exist in WWI but okay.

[Medwind]

Because it would be unnecessary to attempt to conquer Russia? Because invading Russia en mass was nor a part of German agenda, and a favorable peace treaty would be preferable to an extension of the war, and all the many issues that a major offensive campaign in Russia would face? Idk, maybe I'm goofy but it seems likely the treaty would still happen, thus Russia would not be destroyed, as you put it.

Again the hypothetical is pre war not the end of the war. There WAS no treaty between russia and germany. You cant use it in a hypothetical about 1914.

Russia was defending the slavs of Serbia, the germans Austria-hugry's prerogative to get revenge a throughly investigate the assassination. If Russia didnt see itself as the saviour of the orthodox Balkans, and support Serbia in refusing Austrian demands, world war 1 does not happen.

For some reason GB sees its interests in allying with Germany, Wilhelm and George turn out to be secret best buddies and family ties count.. go crazy.. it's a question of how global dynamics would change as a result.

Assuming everything else is the same. It takes a couple of years but France and Russia get destroyed. The british fleet blockades france not germany. The germans do not sink american shipping, and the US does not enter the war.

Assuming everything else is the same. It takes a couple of years but France and Russia get destroyed. The british fleet blockades france not germany. The germans do not sink american shipping, and the US does not enter the war.

Russia gets destroyed huh? What about the peace treaty between the Russians and Germans? Are you telling me the Germans just say fuck it and invade Russia full on afterward? Is the UK fine with that? Do they join in? How long would that take? Etc. etc.

Notice AFTERWORD meaning after the fall of France, and the treaty with Russia, the Germans pushing into Russia with their full might to annex it. That was what was in question dude. I understand the geo-politics of the situation. You are failing to understand my meaning though. I was operating on the assumption that Germany would peace out with Russia during the war just like IRL. You said "destroyed" as in "ceases to exist" meaning full scale invasion, so therefore, "fuck making peace, we're going on to Moscow next" without addressing any of the issues I made during my other posts, (not an actual political goal, the logistical and communication problems, the slow speed of military's at the time, the Russian weather, the vast distances to be traveled, the likelihood of putting the civil war on hold to deal with the imminent threat, Russia's vast manpower, objections/fears of major powers, etc. etc.)