# What if World War I Had Never happened At All ?



## BAYLOR (Mar 7, 2016)

What if this conflict been avoided all together ? In a scenario were it never happened what would Europe be like today and what would the world order be like? Better or worse ? Would there still be a British Empire? What about other Empires ? Would there still be Romanov's ruling in Russia? 


Thoughts?


----------



## Brian G Turner (Mar 7, 2016)

Britain and Germany were increasingly bitter industrial rivals, aiming to be the strong power in Europe. IMO conflict was inevitable. And that's why WWI was caused by the flimsiest of excuses - an Austrian diplomat being shot by an anarchist in Yugoslavia. Everyone was eager for war, to prove their worth and superiority. What they hadn't realised was how much industrialisation would change the face of warfare.


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 13, 2016)

I think the Austrian Empire would have fragmented and broken up  whether or not Franz Ferdinand was assassinated or not. Even if he had come to the throne as ruler It's doubtful that he could stopped the inevitable.  The Austrians and their monarchy were hated by everyone they ruled over.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 18, 2016)

Brian Turner said:


> Britain and Germany were increasingly bitter industrial rivals, aiming to be the strong power in Europe. IMO conflict was inevitable. And that's why WWI was caused by the flimsiest of excuses - an Austrian diplomat being shot by an anarchist in Yugoslavia. Everyone was eager for war, to prove their worth and superiority. What they hadn't realised was how much industrialisation would change the face of warfare.



Not to mention a desire to be the "Number 1 Power" and iirc, The German Empire at least, having not been in existence for very long had missed out on building an Empire in places like Africa, as other European Nations had done, and thus wanted to carve bits of Africa out for itself.

There have been recent attempts at rehabilitating the British Field Commanders, claiming that the "Lions led by Donkeys" meme is a myth, that the only way to win the war was by using archaic tactics and sending hundreds of men walking towards enemy trenches to their deaths, despite the existence of modern weapons. I am not so sure though - for example, making them walk, not run? Beyond the fact that Aeroplanes and Armoured vehicles & Tanks had improved, and allowed the warring sides to reach each others cities, WW2 at the man on the ground level was not hugely different, yet tactics were wildly changed, no more sending entire battallions walking towards their deaths at enemy trenches filled with machine gun posts. I personally think the Commanders in WW1 were simply incapable of adapting to fighting a War in the industrial age. It was practically Napoleonic era tactics that were in use, perfectly fine and workable in an age were Muskets had to be slowly reloaded after every shot, and were not the most accurate, nor had a great range.

When I was working in Normandie & Flanders, I saw the 2 signs at a particular road - on said "on this date, the British Army carried out its very last Cavalry Charge against an enemy" the second sign said "on this date the British Army launched the World's very first attack by Tanks" summed it up - who on earth thought they could still use cavalry charges in a war that had machine guns and far more accurate and powerful artillery?


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 20, 2016)

World war I was a colossal waste of lives and resources. It ruined and embittered Germany and ended its' ruling dynasty, Austria reduced to a fragment of a country, it's dynasty gone. The Ottomans in Turkey broken and gone. Russia traded the yoke of the Romanov's for the yoke of Lenin and the Communists. Even the victors like Britain and France were both weakened as a result.  And of course it it set the stage for a second even more destructive second world war.


----------



## Caledfwlch (Mar 21, 2016)

I personally think that regardless of WW1 Germany would have been unstable or in some form of Civil War - AFAIK WW1 has absolutely nothing to do with the Russian Revolution, apart from making 1917 a damned good time to rise up as the Tsar's Armies were focussed on the eastern front, fighting the German Empire, and thus, Socialist revolts and so on may well have spread as it did anyway - even without the War, the Nazi's were coming - whether they would ever have graduated beyond being a small group of thugs and ideas, like the BNP say in modern Britain, without the humiliation and gross stupidity that was the Treaty of Versailles is of course arguable, but without the chaos etc of the real 20's Mr Hitler would have been another Nick Griffin or Nigel Farage, an also ran.

This is a wonderful video that the BBC did for a WW1 Night - it explains the origins of WW1 via the main protagonists, the Kaiser, King George etc having a rap battle


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 21, 2016)

Caledfwlch said:


> I personally think that regardless of WW1 Germany would have been unstable or in some form of Civil War - AFAIK WW1 has absolutely nothing to do with the Russian Revolution, apart from making 1917 a damned good time to rise up as the Tsar's Armies were focussed on the eastern front, fighting the German Empire, and thus, Socialist revolts and so on may well have spread as it did anyway - even without the War, the Nazi's were coming - whether they would ever have graduated beyond being a small group of thugs and ideas, like the BNP say in modern Britain, without the humiliation and gross stupidity that was the Treaty of Versailles is of course arguable, but without the chaos etc of the real 20's Mr Hitler would have been another Nick Griffin or Nigel Farage, an also ran.
> 
> This is a wonderful video that the BBC did for a WW1 Night - it explains the origins of WW1 via the main protagonists, the Kaiser, King George etc having a rap battle



The big four of  Wilson. Lloyd George . Clemenceau  and Orlando  had an opportunity to create a lasting peace but they let pettiness, shortsightedness and nasty stupidity be their guide.  In part World War II is on them and the decisions they chose to make.  The war guilt clause and making Germany pay for the whole war which all the nations of europe helped ruin was very unjust. Without those two items, there is a reasonable chance that the Nazi party never happens.  

George Clemenceau would have rendered both his country and the world a far more useful service had he died in the Franco Prussian war.


----------



## WaylanderToo (Mar 22, 2016)

Caledfwlch said:


> ...yet tactics were wildly changed, no more sending entire battallions walking towards their deaths at enemy trenches filled with machine gun posts. I personally think the Commanders in WW1 were simply incapable of adapting to fighting a War in the industrial age. It was practically Napoleonic era tactics that were in use, perfectly fine and workable in an age were Muskets had to be slowly reloaded after every shot, and were not the most accurate, nor had a great range...



just to be a little pedantic the Russians still used this 'tactic' in WWII 




Caledfwlch said:


> I personally think that regardless of WW1 Germany would have been unstable or in some form of Civil War - AFAIK WW1 has absolutely nothing to do with the Russian Revolution, apart from making 1917 a damned good time to rise up as the Tsar's Armies were focussed on the eastern front, fighting the German Empire, and thus, Socialist revolts and so on may well have spread as it did anyway



wellllll yes and no. IIRC the Germans sent Lenin back to Russia with the idea of fomenting revolution and thereby forcing Russia out of the war. No WWI, no Lenin in Russia


----------



## BAYLOR (Mar 22, 2016)

WaylanderToo said:


> just to be a little pedantic the Russians still used this 'tactic' in WWII
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Even without  the Lenin and the Revolution ,  the Romanov dynasty was doomed to fall at some point.


----------

