steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Aug 21, 2018 17:41:14 GMT
Weimar will still have to do something about Memel, Danzig and the Corridor as they are itches that political parties of all stripes agreed needed to be scratched. Yes, as in other threads allready discussed... all parties in germany wanted to remove the "failed stuff from Versailles". The Weimar politicans were quite succsessfull in laying the basement of such move later on, another thing Hitler and the nazis "got" from Weimar, just like the recovery of the economics. Memel could propably be solved easily, highly german poplulated i cannpt see this start anything. The Corridor is a problem - propably will lead to a war, but it depends then and how it is started. Danzig - nope, another quite easy point. The people here are 99,6% german, so the League cannot deny a free election about that forever.. just as the Saar, here even the anti-nazis voted for "go back to germany" because they hated the french even more as the nazis The basic problem is something else. OTL the nazis were on the agressive run, building up their armed forces, ruining the economy, later pressing the jews out to get money, then they got the austrians and the chechs money/gold Here, a much saner government (without nazis and communists) would rearm slower, more sane and much more carefully. The Saar come back, 100% sure. The idea of getting Austria into the Reich was a VERY strong idea in germany AND austria in that time, without Hitler this will still happen the one or other way (Tax union is one possibility), esp. if the germans help the austrians to get rid of the austrofachists... Overall the attitude of UK and USA about Versaille would not change, here a democratic government would demand "rightfully" stuff... The Rheinland wouldn´t be rearmed early... but that is not necessary... Sometimes in the mid30ties the germans WOULD rearm, propably fully because as described in the VT nobody disarmed. Poland could or could not attack germany at some point, it is questionable if france would join such agressive move. But let us do such Timeline: 1933 see an uproar with the nazis trying to gain power, in a failed putsch that is crushed very bloody by the Reichswehr. In it the nazi leaders either get killed or captured and later killed by law. Some get pardoned because they were "great heros of the war", i could see Göring escaping... turning to the right wing parties... just like others who aren´t seen as a huge problem. But Hitler, Hess, Röhm will die. The polish now look with huge interest what happens. A new election (without the naziparty who get banned) bring a more stable government, that still improve the economy to gain more work (reducing the unemployment - but say at half the speed as the nazis did OTL). They still build their S and G, just as 20k-Ships, they will still work with the Red Army, learning more, giving more input. Sometimes a german airforce will be public, also the Reichswehr WILL be a Wehrmacht again. Propably a sane and stable process of enlargement, no mad dash as the nazis did. This will trigger the discussed polish reaction, who try to get partners to attack germany. In 1935 this will fail, esp. with the Saar-election making clear to france that the germans hate the french with passion but "harder methods" to get the wet-dream borders are impossible. Sometimes (around 1937-38) the germans would look for either Danzig or Austria.... If it is Austria, France and Italy could work together, with poland. But the Stresa-Front was allready broken, without the nazi dictatorship even more so as OTL. I really cannot see them working together, UK would want the germans on their side (against the italians, if needed), so lets say AUstria gets its Anschluss in 1938. The germans in Danzig now want to join, too and things get out of control First the polish enter the city, crushing the pro german parties, the League is incompetent and inefficent, germany send forces to eastprussia... france demand that germany remove these forces. "informations about massacres" come to germany (propaganda) and germany demands urgently that Danzig get his vote about his place. League does nothing - as it wasn´t able in 1938 to do anything. Germany do not remove the forces that prepare to march into danzig and poland declare war. Germany declare war against poland, france declare war against germany. UK could stay neutral, with delivering weapons to germany (doubtful)... in such scenario germany has no chance to win, in the same time france doesn´t perform good (kindly spoken), poland propably start to kill lots of germans in Danzig (rage about evil huns - we should not forget that poland was a military dicatorship at this time. Now a lot depends on russia. Will it use that to attack poland? Would the germans escalate things here? WOuld they negotiate with the russians before? But you could get a world war out of this. What you do not see - a german war of agression before 1942-45. OTL the germans belived (military) they need lots of time to be ready. Here you have no mad dictator, so the sane(r) politicans would not risk much, build up what they have and look for true and strong allies (they do not betray). One natural ally is russia, esp. if they both could part poland - both would be quite happy to do so. I cannot see such weimar military as strong as nazi army, but still a formidable weapon is possible. But lots of butterflies and lots of changes... |
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Aug 21, 2018 18:01:38 GMT
Weimar will want to do something about the eastern border as much as the Nazis did. Yes... about the corridor and Danzig i agree... but not the nazi-way. OTL the nazis basically allways gambled... in an insane way. Look at their enlargement of the armed forces. From a Reichswehr-POV the new Wehrmacht was completly unusable for fighting till 1940, because the quality of the forces was watered down by a HUGE enlargement. With no Hitler and no nazis the german army would grow much slower... the quality of the NCOs and officers would be higher, the overall quality would be MUCH better prepared. The army also would not only train "attack" but also "retreat", something the nazis removed from the training in 1936 OTL. Also the air force would grow, but not in that way, because no Göring mean no "meddling in 5-year-plans to get me the best toys i want". So german economy will be improving, not destabilizing as the nazis did. Sometimes the german army is strong enough to demand things... propably Danzig should get a voting about what they want (they were in the league control, not under polish control). So germany could escalate a war with poland without running into a declaration of war by UK and france, even if the second is hard to avoid. But in such war poland would be the agressor. Weimar could still work with russia, they could intensify even their work in the secret training locations... you will miss the Fallschirmjäger - a toy of göring and in some aspects the german army is more traditional, but on the other had the major players of the Wehrmacht OTL could still be in power here. At last till 1938. So you see armed forces, tanks and "combined weaponary". The marine will not get Bismarck and Tirpitz, propably Scharnhorst and Gneisenaus is all you get. Cruisers are more reasonable (around 10k, 3x3 15cm, Diesel, long range types), submarines are in the cards, but mostly coastal, still the development of "better weapons" will be done. Just as Weimar developted the Rocket-launchers to ignore Versailles. So my bet is, that germany would look for the chechoslowaks as partners (instead of the infamous invasion), as long as these treat their german big minority good. Here i doubt they wouldn´t do that. Austria - as mentioned would sometimes be part of Great-Germany, no interest in Alsac (esp. after the germans were expulsed), i see germany intensify their trade and military joint ventures with china, so opposition to the japanese is a given. For Weimar the ideal scenario is some conflict with poland in 1940-41, the army is enlarged, trained and prepared, the economy is "ready". Now they need the poles attack germany or allow germany to "defend" Danzig and in the peace treaty post war germany tear poland appart, getting back all areas they lost 1918. Poland could be parted with Russia, just that the OTL "Generalgouvernement" would be the Rump poland, that have to pay lots of money as war reparations... i see expulsion of new settled poles (OTL the poles "motivated" lots of germans to leave the corridor and settled polish people - i doubt the germans would be nice and let em stay, esp. if these fight hard in the lost war scenario), but beside this no huge problems or crimes. Without the ideology of the nazis you see hard treatment in the normal range, not nice, not "nobel-prize-similar", but brutal, ocasional massacres (sadly) included. Poland wasn´t loved in germany in the 20ties and 30ties, if germany win the war they will be hard to poland. Basically some Versailles-type-peace dictate. The problem is france. If france is "in" you could have a world war... how that ends? it is questionable with no british entry (here i really don´t see it, esp. if a democratic germany react to polish agressions), for sure belgium and the netherlands would not be attacked, no villian nazis... the french still would paint the germans as "boche", but with an early end of poland i have problems to see how france could hope to beat the germans and vice versa (you need the sichelschnitt and that needs the ardennes who are in belgium) |
|
futurist
Banned
Banned
Posts: 837 
Likes: 12
|
Post by futurist on Aug 22, 2018 21:28:10 GMT
Weimar will still have to do something about Memel, Danzig and the Corridor as they are itches that political parties of all stripes agreed needed to be scratched. Yes, but the question is whether they would actually be willing to risk war over this. After all, their customs war against Poland failed and thus war is the only option to make changes in regards to this. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,447
Likes: 12,053
|
Post by stevep on Aug 22, 2018 22:12:58 GMT
Weimar will still have to do something about Memel, Danzig and the Corridor as they are itches that political parties of all stripes agreed needed to be scratched. Yes, but the question is whether they would actually be willing to risk war over this. After all, their customs war against Poland failed and thus war is the only option to make changes in regards to this.
I can see a democratic Germany managing to regain Danzig without a conflict [especially if Polish access to sea trade is secured] but attempting to seize by military means of the corridor, let alone non-German lands is likely to lead to a wider war. Especially if its a clearly right wing expansionist government and/or in alliance with Stalin to partition Poland again.
A peaceful absorption of Austria may be possible although a lot would depend on the attitude of both Italy and the Austrians in this case. Without Hitler in control of Germany will Mussolini still attack Ethiopia? If not there is likely to be a combined front to prevent such a merger. If he has then Italy could have found itself isolated [or without concerns about Nazi Germany its even possible the western powers will take a harsher line and possibly even go to war with it]. In the 1st case a skilled political leadership may manage to see Germany take over Austria without conflict or in the 2nd by either peaceful or violent means. However would they seek further territorial expansion?
Other factors are that without the Nazis the German military will expand at a markedly slower rate but could be more skillfully led, or might be dominated by more conservative viewpoints. Also without Germany posing such an immediate threat, especially to Britain, does it take a stronger stance against Japan in China? British and French rearmament will also occur as other countries build up but probably at a less frantic rate, which could be a lot more efficient in the longer run.
|
|
mullauna
Banned
Banned
Posts: 376
Likes: 40
|
Post by mullauna on Aug 23, 2018 4:00:15 GMT
Yes, but the question is whether they would actually be willing to risk war over this. After all, their customs war against Poland failed and thus war is the only option to make changes in regards to this.
I can see a democratic Germany managing to regain Danzig without a conflict [especially if Polish access to sea trade is secured] but attempting to seize by military means of the corridor, let alone non-German lands is likely to lead to a wider war. Especially if its a clearly right wing expansionist government and/or in alliance with Stalin to partition Poland again.
A peaceful absorption of Austria may be possible although a lot would depend on the attitude of both Italy and the Austrians in this case. Without Hitler in control of Germany will Mussolini still attack Ethiopia? If not there is likely to be a combined front to prevent such a merger. If he has then Italy could have found itself isolated [or without concerns about Nazi Germany its even possible the western powers will take a harsher line and possibly even go to war with it]. In the 1st case a skilled political leadership may manage to see Germany take over Austria without conflict or in the 2nd by either peaceful or violent means. However would they seek further territorial expansion?
Other factors are that without the Nazis the German military will expand at a markedly slower rate but could be more skillfully led, or might be dominated by more conservative viewpoints. Also without Germany posing such an immediate threat, especially to Britain, does it take a stronger stance against Japan in China? British and French rearmament will also occur as other countries build up but probably at a less frantic rate, which could be a lot more efficient in the longer run.
By the mid-late thirties, the Entente no longer wanted to enforce the terms of Versailles. In our world that was unfortunately too late to save Weimar, but just nicely for Herr Hitler... |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,447
Likes: 12,053
|
Post by stevep on Aug 23, 2018 9:40:02 GMT
I can see a democratic Germany managing to regain Danzig without a conflict [especially if Polish access to sea trade is secured] but attempting to seize by military means of the corridor, let alone non-German lands is likely to lead to a wider war. Especially if its a clearly right wing expansionist government and/or in alliance with Stalin to partition Poland again.
A peaceful absorption of Austria may be possible although a lot would depend on the attitude of both Italy and the Austrians in this case. Without Hitler in control of Germany will Mussolini still attack Ethiopia? If not there is likely to be a combined front to prevent such a merger. If he has then Italy could have found itself isolated [or without concerns about Nazi Germany its even possible the western powers will take a harsher line and possibly even go to war with it]. In the 1st case a skilled political leadership may manage to see Germany take over Austria without conflict or in the 2nd by either peaceful or violent means. However would they seek further territorial expansion?
Other factors are that without the Nazis the German military will expand at a markedly slower rate but could be more skillfully led, or might be dominated by more conservative viewpoints. Also without Germany posing such an immediate threat, especially to Britain, does it take a stronger stance against Japan in China? British and French rearmament will also occur as other countries build up but probably at a less frantic rate, which could be a lot more efficient in the longer run.
By the mid-late thirties, the Entente no longer wanted to enforce the terms of Versailles. In our world that was unfortunately too late to save Weimar, but just nicely for Herr Hitler...
Not all the terms of Versailles but some of them. Even with the reoccupation of the Rhineland France was willing to intervene if they could have got political support from Britain and that would have been enough to make Hitler back down and quite possibly cause a crisis for the Nazis. With a more democratic German regime you might have got some agreement for limited reoccupation but your markedly less likely to have them risk going in unilaterally so even that could be delayed. Definitely annexation of the Czechs or of the Polish provinces that Germany held before 1918 are likely to be red flags.
|
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Aug 23, 2018 10:30:02 GMT
Yes, but the question is whether they would actually be willing to risk war over this. After all, their customs war against Poland failed and thus war is the only option to make changes in regards to this.
I can see a democratic Germany managing to regain Danzig without a conflict [especially if Polish access to sea trade is secured] but attempting to seize by military means of the corridor, let alone non-German lands is likely to lead to a wider war. Especially if its a clearly right wing expansionist government and/or in alliance with Stalin to partition Poland again.
A peaceful absorption of Austria may be possible although a lot would depend on the attitude of both Italy and the Austrians in this case. Without Hitler in control of Germany will Mussolini still attack Ethiopia? If not there is likely to be a combined front to prevent such a merger. If he has then Italy could have found itself isolated [or without concerns about Nazi Germany its even possible the western powers will take a harsher line and possibly even go to war with it]. In the 1st case a skilled political leadership may manage to see Germany take over Austria without conflict or in the 2nd by either peaceful or violent means. However would they seek further territorial expansion?
Other factors are that without the Nazis the German military will expand at a markedly slower rate but could be more skillfully led, or might be dominated by more conservative viewpoints. Also without Germany posing such an immediate threat, especially to Britain, does it take a stronger stance against Japan in China? British and French rearmament will also occur as other countries build up but probably at a less frantic rate, which could be a lot more efficient in the longer run.
As usual, it depends on the POV. From the german one (all Weimar parties, maybe with the exception of the KPD) all "stolen ground" in the east had to get back. It doesn´t matter for them if now in the corridor because of "expulsion" (as some claimed) more poles live in. If they get a chance to get it back they would take that chance. ALL of them saw it that way. So in this Hitler and all democratic parties had the same view. You are right that the Weimar-Governments would still hurt poland in any way short of war, would negotiate with the enemies of poland (that were many, chechoslovakia, russia to name two) and if poland make a mistake, they would strike. Abessinia was a wet dream for Mussolini, esp. with the huge morale hitting defeat in 1895 he wanted to "took revenge". We know that the italians slaughtered in a very brutal way the colonial subjects in africa... sorry there is no chance that M. would not start that war, he needed it internal, for his prestige. Some forget that he could every day got removed by the king... so that victory made his position stronger. So it is a good bet that Mussolini would ALLWAYS strike in africa, causing france and UK to turn hostile against italy. For me that is a given. The question is - how would the austrian nazis react, if the Weimarer Government, after recovering from depression (propably 2-3 years delay to Hitlers rise, but based on a healthy economy) would seek the Anschluss/Unification. For germany the perfect timing was important. I see this in the time 1938-39... IN 1935 they get back the Saarland... that is 100% proof. With this they raise their coal production in a significant way. The army and air force will be created - again it was a given and a weakness of Versailles, because germany (as hitler did) rightfully could claim that the others failed in disarment. So france would still build its Maginot-line, they started it even pre-Hitler, so i see no point in not building it. Germany on the other hand - not led by a racist mad man - would act more carefully. So the army is better trained, slowly enlarged, so more time to reach the same size, but for sure germany would enlarge its army at "will"... because there was no difference to Hitler in the opinion that germany needed an army to defend itself from a two-front-war... in germany nobody thought different. The main positive points are - no brain drain from jewish or leftist experts... they will stay, more would come. Expect 30-40% more and faster developments of stuff that had otl been found in the other countries (the jewish scientists flee to) - the airforce is build "smarter"... so less numbers, but more cost efficency. OTL Göring could spent as much money as he wanted, here the Airforce need to be less wasteful. No clue what planes would be used, but i cannot see the "Divebomber"-mentality... as OTL in germany. With no need for a quick war - neither the army nor the politicans want one large war now - they could develop better and longer. - People like Heinkel could get their He112 through, maybe the engine devlopment is more competitive and less corruption is in the cards. - Junkers will not loose his influence - no nazi megalaniac projects - there could be a peenemünde-secret-project, but less funds... slower and smaller... but who knows, with more (jewish) scientists you could get similar results? Open to discuss... OTL in the 30ties the nazis did not spent much money in this... - the navy experiment for sure with subs, esp. if they get em back - something as the deal with UK is even more realistic, because germany is still a democracy... with italy running amok and Stalin announcing his naval dreams there are still such deals... so the AGNT is quite possible (i give it a 80% chance)... - as mentioned in the Airforce, no need to have the biggest ships - OTL it was Hitler who needed the "Biggest", so follow ups of S and G could be delayed or smaller. For sure you have aircraft-carriers, but again propably smaller and earlier testing beds. A naval airforce is a given - it was Göring who made the problems here. So more special land based bombers for naval work, propably an earlier development of air dropped torpedos, more long range recon planes, specially build for the navy. No wonderweapons, maybe also big failures, but for sure more orientated for the needs of the navy. - Tanks - again the army would want em, the path to the modern armed forces of the Wehrmacht were layed down in the weimar-time... so no hope for potential enemies. The difference to Nazi germany... you get a better logistics, more trained soldiers, less divisions (instead of 10 say 5, but these are fully trained to "german standards"), the weaponary is "better"... if they work still with the russians and they learn from their better tanks (even the BT-5 and later BT-7 were vastly superior to german Mark1 and Mark2) you could get more impact from here. The core different to Hitler is, the germans want no "lebensraum im osten", they want basically Versailles undone, potential enemies broken up (esp. poland is either removed or reduced to a rump poland), but no genocide, no mass killings or such nasty stuff. The politics are difficulty to see, because in one way that germany want the baltics and scandinavian countries staying strong and alive (for a possible counter to russia), on the other hand strong and working ties with the USSR are also welcomed. Why should Weimar drop a good partner, for whom? France? Never, Italy? Hostile , UK? Not trustworthy... So a lot depends on how Stalin act in the critical years. Another point, with Weimar arming slowly, how would the OTL Allies react? Build as much and as fast as OTL or slower? UK and france still face the problem JAPAN and ITALY, just the strongest enemy of OTL, germany is missing. THe OTL performance of the two nations till september 1939 was - well quite bad. i could see a balkan war in 1939-40, with that timining germany could do the Anschluss in a time in that Italy is a pariah and threatened with war as it try to attack yugoslawia, in the same time germany declaring FOR yugoslavia, supporting them massivly with weapons. Would Stalin risk to invade the baltics if europe is "peaceful"? I doubt he would.. he was very carefully... a finnish adventure, lots of french and british volunteers and massive armament spending for the finns is quite possible. After all no war with nazi germany. Germany recovering from the depression would around 1940-41 reach a level it could start to controll much of the economy of central europe, also it would be possibly seen as a defender of democracy against russian or italian agression. You still have the problem poland (if not exploded into war by a german-russian plot), so france is open hostile to germany, germany HATE france and trust UK as much as a kid could throw a house, Roosevelt is propably gone - so the german hating president could no longer influence the USA... Again, lots and lots of butterflies... You could bet on a war started because of poland/Danzig, either created by stupidity of poland (painting them as the agressor) around 1940, or - if germany had fully recovered and prepared for war the germans move in - around 1943-45 to get back what they see as "stolen" by a long redone Versailles-treaty. One possiblility for the "polish problem" from a Weimar POV is the timing with a pacific war... sometimes in the early 40ties such conflict would happen (my opinion), so if france is threatend to loose Indochina, UK too, they have to look for it. That could be the "right time" for Weimar to strike - demand Danzig-voting and escalate a conflict with trigger-happy poland. How would france/UK react in such situation? Maybe in a time in that yugoslavia fight together with germany and greece against italian agression? |
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Aug 23, 2018 10:48:19 GMT
By the mid-late thirties, the Entente no longer wanted to enforce the terms of Versailles. In our world that was unfortunately too late to save Weimar, but just nicely for Herr Hitler...
Not all the terms of Versailles but some of them. Even with the reoccupation of the Rhineland France was willing to intervene if they could have got political support from Britain and that would have been enough to make Hitler back down and quite possibly cause a crisis for the Nazis. With a more democratic German regime you might have got some agreement for limited reoccupation but your markedly less likely to have them risk going in unilaterally so even that could be delayed. Definitely annexation of the Czechs or of the Polish provinces that Germany held before 1918 are likely to be red flags.
Nope - again germany was unified in its interests against versailles. Full control of the rheinland is the major point here. It doesn´t matter if germany is nazi or democratic, they will try and sometimes get full control back. France is way to weak and if the nazis as a brutal and hated dicatorship could do it, why on earth do you think a - later say in 1937 or 38 done reoccupation of the rheinland would see France starting a war about it? There is no "limitation" in this, no german government will stay with this, just because it was unjust (my opinion) and in that time it was a HUGE problem seen in germany. THe czechs are safe, germany saw the sudeten not as their problem... that could be happening if austria is included and if benesch is mad enough to supress them, but then germany would demand a solution solved by the league, only if they - stopped/manipulated by france - would not do something germany would strike. Poland - as a brutal dicatorship supressing minorities - will sometimes run into a conflict. With the czechs propably... if germany is smart they could work WITH the czechs, or if that crisis is avoided sometimes in the early 40ties danzig could be used. There will be no fake, but propably poland would start something quite stupid, angering UK. France without UK starting a war with poland against germany for Danzig? Nope.. .the french people would not support this. After danzig germany could work with stalin, waiting for france beeing distracted (say in indochina - japanese agressions)... then they fake something, or let Stalin be the boogieman... who knows... Stalin for sure will look for a "just" border correction, undoing the stolen areas from 1920. If this happens germany would strike and take back what was taken 1918. if france then start a war about this, they will loose it. Badly. You also have zero opposition in germany - they ALL wanted back what was taken from germany in the east. France on the other hand is teared appart... you have the right wing politicans who want to crush germany, but a big block of socialists would not support that if Stalin is involved. Poland was a bad boy of the 30ties... that is often forgotten because the nazi crimes from 39 on. At any date the dicatorship could start a conflict with the czechs... how react the french if the czechs AND the germans strike back? OTL in the 20ties and early 30ties the french forced a weak germany (and austria) to do stuff THEY want em to do. With a recovered germany that has a strong army again (a given), france cannot threaten anything. If their "partners" start to fight each other (Poland -> Czechs) germany could side with one side (Czechs) and if that escalates they could invade poland and crush em. WIth only taking what was theirs in 1918, nobody would do much... so the question is : would the french start a war with a victorious STRONG germany, that just helped the czechs to defend themselves from polish agressions? Also you have italy, that wanted to take the balkan into their hands... that is also a HUGE distraction. You even could see a naked agressive move by germany, say in the moment italy face a france declaration of war... if germany strike in such time, the czechs propably would strike, too... maybe even Stalin would use this timing. So poland see itself attacked by 3 sides and is quickly defeated. Instead of including everything, a rump poland (basically in the east pre1920, in the west minus german boders of 1914) survive, all agressors happily accept a new but weak government. Landlocked they get some trading rights, but france has lost every hope to attack germany from two sides, the czechs now are german bound (but that could be useful, if the hungarians - also facistis- start something) As i wrote, lots of butterflies and lots of changes to OTL are possible. But - if you look to 1950 you see in 1000 variants 980x germany in its borders of 1914 (outside denmark and in the west), strong and powerful, with a deadly hostile but hopeless inefficent france in opposition. Propably belgium and the netherlands, denmark and the other scandinavian nations, yugoslavia, the czechs, austria are all working together, either with or without the baltics (i think in 50% of the variants they are taken by stalin, in the other 50% they have turned to the central european block in that a rump poland is the only - very weak - allied nation for france) Sometimes around 1950 germany have nukes and it is finally game-over for france dreams of the natural border (river rhine)... |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,447
Likes: 12,053
|
Post by stevep on Aug 23, 2018 10:59:07 GMT
Steffen The problem is that your arguing for the conquest of Poland and the annexation of a lot of Polish territory, most of which is overwhelmingly Polish and was before 1918. This is going to cause problems both on moral grounds and because the western allies see a militaristic Germany on the march again, causing them concerns. Where this looks more or less threatening that Stalin would be a difficult point but as you say Stalin was very cautious. Hence if Germany starts attacking eastern nations, most especially Czechoslovakia and Poland it is likely to cause a lot of concern. There is no way Germany will get overwhelming Polish areas like Posen under their control without a fight and the sort of we're a superior people stance your suggesting, with the right to trample over other people when we wish will cause a lot of concerns.
Italy may well still attack Ethiopia as OTL but its not certain. If it does then as OTL Germany may use that conflict to make moves itself, especially if the western powers take stronger action against Italy but that could involve war and the replacement of Mussolini's regime by a democratic one. Similarly the Spanish civil war may not occur or could end up with a republican victory without fascist support from Germany and possibly Italy - which if isolated might also refrain from supporting Franco. There are too many butterflies to say.
Japan is almost certain to follow the OTL path which, along with the massive obsolesce in much of the RN for instance and the continued threat from Italy [if not war with it] and a slower but still rearming Germany will prompt a level of rearmament in the western powers, but at a slower level. You may see a conflict earlier with Japan because the democracies feel able to take a stronger stance. Germany again may seek conquests in eastern/central Europe during this but one question raises? Do they also attack the western powers?
If they don't then once Japan is defeated the western powers are more likely to be able to defend themselves against a later German attack, especially since they will have more war experience, while its conquests will mean Germany has a border with the SU so they will have to maintain forces on two fronts, which makes a later attack on France and the low countries less likely. If they do they could conquer much of western Europe as OTL but am likely to effective re-create the OTL alliance as Britain, the US and a probably markedly larger Free French power will be fighting both Japan and Germany. [They may not actually succeed in such an attack because there are a lot of butterflies, which could be the worst situation for Germany but the best for the rest of Europe]. This could lead to a long war but with a Japan already on the back foot being defeated 1st.
Steve
|
|
perkeo
Petty Officer 2nd Class
Posts: 25
Likes: 6
|
Post by perkeo on Aug 26, 2018 19:56:55 GMT
Weimar will want to do something about the eastern border as much as the Nazis did. I couldn't agree more with the first half of the sentence - and less about the second half.
Yes, all the parties were extremely reluctant to accept the fact that the corridor was Polish, and would likely stay so even if Danzig were returned, but that doesn't mean any party except the Nazis wanted another great war - and/or had illusions about its outcome - let alone wanted Lebensraum.
There's a difference between Nazi Germany and Non-Nazi-Germany. The latter would have waited for an opportunity, just as France did after Alsace-Lorraine.
|
|
mullauna
Banned
Banned
Posts: 376
Likes: 40
|
Post by mullauna on Aug 26, 2018 23:01:46 GMT
Also Austria WELCOMED the German annexation. It was only in 1945 that they found being German wasn't much fun and decided to pretend that they had never wanted it. Had Hitler not started WWII, Austria would still be part of Germany today.
|
|
futurist
Banned
Banned
Posts: 837
Likes: 12
|
Post by futurist on Aug 27, 2018 6:55:24 GMT
Weimar will want to do something about the eastern border as much as the Nazis did. I couldn't agree more with the first half of the sentence - and less about the second half.
Yes, all the parties were extremely reluctant to accept the fact that the corridor was Polish, and would likely stay so even if Danzig were returned, but that doesn't mean any party except the Nazis wanted another great war - and/or had illusions about its outcome - let alone wanted Lebensraum.
There's a difference between Nazi Germany and Non-Nazi-Germany. The latter would have waited for an opportunity, just as France did after Alsace-Lorraine.
France was only able to reacquire Alsace-Lorraine as a result of World War I, though. |
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Aug 31, 2018 14:49:08 GMT
Weimar will want to do something about the eastern border as much as the Nazis did. I couldn't agree more with the first half of the sentence - and less about the second half.
Yes, all the parties were extremely reluctant to accept the fact that the corridor was Polish, and would likely stay so even if Danzig were returned, but that doesn't mean any party except the Nazis wanted another great war - and/or had illusions about its outcome - let alone wanted Lebensraum.
There's a difference between Nazi Germany and Non-Nazi-Germany. The latter would have waited for an opportunity, just as France did after Alsace-Lorraine.
Well - yes and no. Yes, the weimar-parties (except the NSDAP) had no dream about "Lebensraum" in the east, it was a death child for them. But all of them wanted to get back their 1914 borders in the east. They were no "we are democrats, we respect the enforced borders so poland get a chance to weak or attack us together with france"-idea of the Entente post-ww1. they all wanted the strength of "imperial germany" back. Even alsac would be in the cards, if they get it without war. Most, no all german parties wanted to avoid a war they could not win. They saw a war with france as a war with UK, they had learned the "hungry" way that they had no meaning to break a blockade (to win easily against france wasn´t in their cards)... so they decided to drop it. But, lets say france turn red and - after a war against UK, germany, belgium the dutch and spain they loose it, germany would take alsac in the next seconds. Even the most democrats would do that. The only border they could live with was in the north, with denmark.. because both sides had no hostile approach to it. But even here, if they could gain the 1914-borders, the weimar parties would take them. The difference between the others and hitler, they wanted to get stuff without risk of war, esp. a two-front-war or a large "world-war". A conflict with poland, in that poland attacks germany, germany is safe from french agression and could crush poland? You get 90% support for that. So, any german weimar government would try to crush the polish military dicatorship, as long as it owns one part of the "1914-borders". Even after they get that stuff back, as long as poland is a weapon for the french (two front war), the germans would do anything to weaken them. that only changes if france loose them, poland turns on the germans as a partner, a true one. Then germany would still demand all "stolen stuff" back, from SPD to DNVP, but otherwise no interest in polish areas. The Sudeten-crisis of OTL is none here, as long as benesch start no bullshit... OTL the czechs treated their german minorities quite good, so no conflict here. But again, if these want to join germany you quickly find some right parties who would support that. After WW1 the germans thought strongly about "we need to protect and use all german areas to get strong again"... either by conquering them or by negotiating them. Perfect peaceful scenario for this is a strong alliance between the czechs and the germans, against the polish. Again - as long as the czechs threatens germans for french interests, they see em as hostile... the sudetenareas give em an easy way to take em out.l But - in opposition to hitler and the nazis, Weimar have zero interest in them. |
|
steffen
Ensign
Posts: 300
Likes: 18
|
Post by steffen on Aug 31, 2018 16:52:37 GMT
Steffen The problem is that your arguing for the conquest of Poland and the annexation of a lot of Polish territory, most of which is overwhelmingly Polish and was before 1918. This is going to cause problems both on moral grounds and because the western allies see a militaristic Germany on the march again, causing them concerns. Where this looks more or less threatening that Stalin would be a difficult point but as you say Stalin was very cautious. Hence if Germany starts attacking eastern nations, most especially Czechoslovakia and Poland it is likely to cause a lot of concern. There is no way Germany will get overwhelming Polish areas like Posen under their control without a fight and the sort of we're a superior people stance your suggesting, with the right to trample over other people when we wish will cause a lot of concerns.
Italy may well still attack Ethiopia as OTL but its not certain. If it does then as OTL Germany may use that conflict to make moves itself, especially if the western powers take stronger action against Italy but that could involve war and the replacement of Mussolini's regime by a democratic one. Similarly the Spanish civil war may not occur or could end up with a republican victory without fascist support from Germany and possibly Italy - which if isolated might also refrain from supporting Franco. There are too many butterflies to say.
Japan is almost certain to follow the OTL path which, along with the massive obsolesce in much of the RN for instance and the continued threat from Italy [if not war with it] and a slower but still rearming Germany will prompt a level of rearmament in the western powers, but at a slower level. You may see a conflict earlier with Japan because the democracies feel able to take a stronger stance. Germany again may seek conquests in eastern/central Europe during this but one question raises? Do they also attack the western powers?
If they don't then once Japan is defeated the western powers are more likely to be able to defend themselves against a later German attack, especially since they will have more war experience, while its conquests will mean Germany has a border with the SU so they will have to maintain forces on two fronts, which makes a later attack on France and the low countries less likely. If they do they could conquer much of western Europe as OTL but am likely to effective re-create the OTL alliance as Britain, the US and a probably markedly larger Free French power will be fighting both Japan and Germany. [They may not actually succeed in such an attack because there are a lot of butterflies, which could be the worst situation for Germany but the best for the rest of Europe]. This could lead to a long war but with a Japan already on the back foot being defeated 1st.
Steve
Hi, sorry - i do not "argue for" something, i just guess based on the people of that time how they would act if they get a chance to do so. That is a difference. For the germans they could care less if some "pollacks" claim that an area was polish, because poland hadn´t existed since 1795... so, yes some german areas had more poles as others. They would not "conquer" poland, they would take back what was "theirs" (so their thinking) in 1914. The huge motivation for the germans of the 20ties was that they were treated unfair by the evil entente... they do not care if some areas are heavily populated with poles... they offer them the same the poles offered them in the 20ties... some money for the ground. Nothing more. The germans would not start a war about poland, would not want to "conquer all of them"... but if they get the chance to break the neck of the polish military dicatorship that threatens the safety of germany, take back their areas they owned in 1914, they will do that. They are not mad like Hitler, they do not plan genocide in the east. But they would try to get back danzig, they would still fight against poland in tax wars, they would - if they get the chance - fall into the back of an attacked poland. If poland - as agressive as it was OTL, would try to take some czech area in a small border war, say in 1940, they could run into a german-czech alliance in that the poles get defeated, kicked out of some areas and have to accept a peace treaty in that they loose the taken areas of 1918, also areas to the czechs... that would be the weimar-way. No genocids, no massacres... but hard as a stone to any defeated poland. Also, if poland get into conflict with russia, expect germany invading them at their weakest point, taking the areas they lost. But you miss my point... Weimar would not start a war. They would demand the right for Danzig to decide itself. The result is - they want to be part of germany (that is a given). Poland breaks this, by moving in, killing some demonstrants. Germany declare this is a crime, demand for the LoN to intervene. The LoN does nothing, germany declare war based on this. What will the LoN do? Attack germany for defending people who want to be germans, supressed by brutal polish occupation (be sure the german Wochenschau will paint the poles as monsters). Who could deny the germans that they make sure that the brutal polish agressor is tamed a bit? Hope you get the picture the Weimar governments would do it. Even smarter i bet, propably wait for some conflict with the czechs, caused by polish agression. That would solve 2 problems for Weimar. 1.) France loose another partner against germany 2.) poland will suffer by the czechs and the germans... That would be the strategy of the germans of weimar. Be careful, but if your enemy (poland) is distracted, weak or without help, create some incident that helps you to gain what was "yours". We will never agree about the right of germany to get back what was taken from imperial germanies borders of 1914. In a war, you could expcet lots of poles - who unfortunatly also would propably act quite hostile to the germans who live here as the war starts, get on the streets, running east. So, if that war ends with a negotiated peace after Weimar forces crushed the polish army, germany would keep the former areas. Period. France may try to fight about that, but UK of 1940 or 1941 would not start a war, if the germans are NOT the agressors in that war. Weimar would not attack the czechs, they would try to turn em into allies... the idea of weimar is to make sure that the arch enemy france, who openly wanted to destroy germany as a state (this was the way the germans of that time saw it in their majority) cannot use others for this. So - poland - hostile - need to get removed as a military force. Option 1: talk to russia to attack em (they want revenge for their defeat) Option 2: talk to the czechs, so they could claim stuff the poles wanted from them, maybe also strategic areas.. depends Option 3: create a hostile situation, in that poland attack germany or germany is "forced" to help people against brutal polish unjust behaviour. Perfect scenario: Danzig, ruled by the League, but if the people demand to get german AND the poles invade, they are alone. This is the most realistic scenario for such conflict. But - germany would "start" such conflict only with france, uk, italy and others been distracted. That is the common "great game"... chances are: some italian versus  conflict, in that france and/or UK are drawn in. some japanese versus Allies-war, in that france need to move lots of forces and assets to the pacific some russian versus - conflict, perfectly some russian-finnish conflict, in that the french want to sent lots of material, maybe even troops to fight russia. See, in any scenario france will think twice if it help poland, esp. with poland beeing the "AGRESSOR"... at last that is the picture the germans would paint them. With no sudeten-crisis, no hitler, no nürnberg-laws, no reichskristall-night, you have just germany, suppressed by "unfair" versailles conditions, who were basically pushed by hostile france, that try to get back its position as great power. That is something the french would hate, but i cannot see france starting a war about that "fact". UK will see germany more as a potential allied nation against japan, esp. if germany keep its good contacts to china (this is a given from my pov, because Weimar also had a long and good mind and in germany they supported business with china instead something with "evil japan". OTL Hitler ended this contacts for his "Achse". Stalin also could be a good partner of the germans. They hate communism (outside the KPD), but if both have something - esp. in the time before germany is full rearmed - they benefit BOTH from it. Add in that both had no love for poland and you get an interesting option... full without the "anti red hordes"-ideology of the nazis. This germany get so many chances, if it is not ruled by mad nazi hitler, they will gain their fruits. Austria and the former german borders in the east are two fundamental things the germans want to change. Again - not in the mad sense of the nazis, who also were "forced" to attack or run into ruin because they exploded their budgets, but more on a rational kind, just like they did OTL in the 20ties to reduce or remove the Versailles-"Chains". so, no agressive wars, but smart moves in that the french are distracted (Mussolini in Ethophia, in Greece, in Yugoslavia, in Albania... or the japanese start troubles)... if UK is also involved (japan strikes is the best time) it would be perfect for weimar germany. We know with 20/20 that the italians and/or japanese would do something stupid, maybe even spain could be the point of change ... with no nazis saving franco from defeat either italy need to push more or the republicans win. I cannot see weimar germany moving forces to help a facist dictator... so germany save ressources, but also do not gain experience. For sure they will send "Observers"... the world will change from OTL seriously from say spring 1937... but if poland thinks they need to strike (similar to OTL 1933) things could change significantly earlier. I doubt that a polish war of agression would gain support in france or UK... say in 1934 because poland "thinks" it would be good for them. Also i see in such war germany fully rearm (with the support of UK), propably also with the czechs supporting germany (Poland had claims against the czechs and commited that loud). |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 23,447
Likes: 12,053
|
Post by stevep on Aug 31, 2018 20:50:25 GMT
Steffen
As you say your the German attitude regardless of whatever government it has would be a war of conquest against Poland. You know damned well a lot of the area we're talking about is majority Polish and was before 1914.
Steve
|
|
conflict, in that france and/or UK are drawn in.