- Location
- Albany, NY
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Not a problem. But yeah I mean that they would probably start it up again.Sorry, I thought continue and resume meant the same thing.
And probably export it more.
Not a problem. But yeah I mean that they would probably start it up again.Sorry, I thought continue and resume meant the same thing.
I know this thread is focused on the aftermath but, FYI, there is a neglected point of divergence for a Central Powers Victory: Romania not joining the Allies. Read https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/wi-romania-remains-neutral-in-wwi.275324/. Falkenhayn, who was opposed to unlimited submarine warfare, would keep his job, preventing the US from entering the war.
In addition, the Central Powers would have more food and would be able to spend more troops against the Russians and the French. Russia may have left the war earlier than in our timeline.
Wiking is not exactly an unbiased source when it comes to analyzing the logistics and merits of German military strategy.
Not a little.Wiking is not exactly an unbiased source when it comes to analyzing the logistics and merits of German military strategy.
To the end of the war their debts we're to be paid by indemnities which is why they were so harsh to Romania and Russia.
German Victory against the French, Russians and British of the IOTL war means the world is in a Great Depression within a year or two of the peace. Even in a scenario where only France and Russia are defeated and Britain gets a white peace it's only a matter of buying a short while
It had many attributes (militarism, an anti-semitic streak, aversion to democracy) that led to the Third Reich.
I couldn't say for sure, but weren't these same attributes were present in several European countries at the time? Would you say that the Kaiser's influence exacerbated these problems?
France wanted to use reparations to punish Germany and did. But had financed their war debts during the war.Didn't the French want to do a similar thing only to be restrained by the British and Americans from asking for "too much"?
I think, as Japhy outlined earlier, securing an Entente victory would be too important for the US to just sit out the war. Even if there's not a clear cassus belli to enter the war due to no USW, the US is going to do everything it can to help Britain and France win in terms of finances and supplies. And as the stakes get higher and higher, pressure will mount for the US to enter directly anyway.
I think, as Japhy outlined earlier, securing an Entente victory would be too important for the US to just sit out the war. Even if there's not a clear cassus belli to enter the war due to no USW, the US is going to do everything it can to help Britain and France win in terms of finances and supplies. And as the stakes get higher and higher, pressure will mount for the US to enter directly anyway.
More importantly, the blockade of Germany will continue regardless, and I doubt Romania alone could supply enough food to solve that even if the Germans could afford to keep buying it.
IMO Germany's best hope of winning after 1914-1915 is a Russian-esque mass mutiny on the Western Front. I don't know enough about the OTL French mutiny or internal French politics at the time to tell you how likely that is but even if it's minute it's definitely more likely than a German military victory at that point.
Not exactly a ringing endorsement for the Imperials not picking up where they left off.
Not a problem. But yeah I mean that they would probably start it up again.
And probably export it more.
[1] Better in the terms that everyone can agree about, like less lives lost in WW1 and beyond and less destructive wars in the future.
Thing is, the Herero and Namaqua genocide was, as far as we know, not ordered by the German authorities. It was von Trotha's doing. I know the Kaiser approved of it but other German authorities did not
they had a reasonable man as governor and they sacked him because he was against extermination. The desire for genocide was not that of a small elite who could be removed, but rampant throughout the army, the royal family, the settlers and even the civilians back home, who bought postcards decorated with pictures of dead and dying Herero. And moreover it was a desire felt by people who had lived alongside, and been allied to, the Herero for over a decade.
The crime of this was not an aberration, it was an obvious escalation of standard practice. It happened because the Herero and the Nama had land and the Germans wanted it.
It feels like the only way you're getting this is if Germany wins fast and less plans to plunder can be entrenched. That still won't give you a very stable Europe and Germany will still be a militant nation, but you can at least bodge your way through.
@Gary Oswald had an article on this (contains picture of corpse), and while the Reichstag revolted "it took weeks for the German Reichstag to convince Kaiser Wilhelm II to revoke the extermination order von Trotha had issued". (Von Trotha then rounded them up as slave labour instead, which was 'fine') And the Germans in the are were all down with slaughter:
The r/AskHistorians thread I linked to takes a different position
The askhistorians answer giver isn't a flaired user so qe don't know his qualifications but he certainly represents a mainstream stream of histiography in blaming von trotha.
The argument often just comes down to what is the hereo genocide. The extermination order was unambiguously a personal decision by von Trotha that the German government walked back on.
The slave labour and concentration camps equally unambiguously remained active long after von trotha was no longer in the country.