You are not logged in.

21

Wednesday, November 24th 2010, 12:59am

He did OTL until 1917.

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

22

Wednesday, November 24th 2010, 5:48am

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
[7] There’s a problem with this, unfortunately, as well as half the fights in the war (Somme, Ypres, etc). With the German route through Belgium blocked by the Dutch, there’s not much of a way for the Germans to make offensives in this sector. The only acceptable way to maintain most of the historical campaigns is if the Germans continue pushing troops through Belgium even while the Dutch garrison the country.


Not really a issue as I envisioned it. The Dutch acted as a shield between the Belgian civilians and the German, serving as Law enforcement and administration. This was with agreement of the Germans, as the international outrage over the massacre of civilians was causing problems.

German supply routes through most of the country would have remained intact, and I presume some areas would have remained under complete German control. Indeed, the Dutch intervention should have freed limited numbers of troops from occupation and Military police duties.

I will note that the British blockade of the Netherlands started *before* this- as part of the overall Blockade of Germany, they considered Rotterdam a Port of Germany- that's historical. It's also one reason the Dutch Queen might tweak the British nose by administrating Belgium. The blockade and subsequent collusion allowed the 1916 Indian attack on the Dutch in the Andaman Islands.

my phrasing was :
The execution of the Schlieffen plan allowed the German armies to sweep through Luxembourg and Belgium. Luxembourg capitulated, but Belgium resisted for days before the Germans shattered King Albert I's army. Entente propaganda decried the "merciless hun" and the "rape of Belgium". Massacres of Belgian civilians reported at Andenne, Tamines, and Dinant, up to 5,500 Belgians reported dead.

Queen Wilhelmina announces " The House of Orange has served and protected the peoples of the Lowlands for four centuries. We have grown concerned that our peoples are suffering needlessly under the occupation of a hostile army. We have offered to assume the neutral administration of occupied Belgium and a equal and fair administration of the laws. We come as friends to shield our ancient countrymen, and should any governing city or province of Belgium request it, we allow them to return to German occupation."

With the concurrence of the Germans, the Six Regiments of the Household marched into Flanders, where they were welcomed by the Flemish. The Walloons, instigators of the 1830 revolt, initially refused the Dutch presence, but by December, having seen the peace of Dutch-controlled Flanders, requested the Dutch Army to take over. Luxembourg remains run by the collaborationist Grand Duchess Marie-Adelaide.

The Queen's action initially spurred a new governmental crisis, which abated when the warm welcome the Flemish gave became clear. In December, the Netherlands government voted to relieve the household regiments with units of the regular army.

Within the Entente, and Albert's government in exile, muted outrage was the response. However there was little desire to spur the Dutch to officially join the Germans, adding ~18 divisions and their small fleet of 4 predreadnaughts and 2 battlecruisers, and raiding-suitable cruisers to the Central Powers.

23

Wednesday, November 24th 2010, 7:00am

That phrasing seems to me to indicate that, at least on the Belgian front, things stayed *somewhat* close to OTL, and wrote all of the main Western Front battles as historical.

Quoted

Originally posted by TexanCowboy
He did OTL until 1917.

I cannot find any mention of that in any of his biographies. In any case, Riga wasn't his home - Kiev was. His biography implies he worked a lot in St. Petersburg, and historically fled to the US to seek opportunities to bring his designs to fruition. Those opportunities would never be available to him in Riga, so there'd be no realistic chance of him staying there - if indeed you can prove he was ever there to start with.

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

24

Wednesday, November 24th 2010, 8:16am

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
That phrasing seems to me to indicate that, at least on the Belgian front, things stayed *somewhat* close to OTL, and wrote all of the main Western Front battles as historical.



Thats what it seemed from the list of battles, but Note [7] seemed to need clarification.

The Dutch intervention was designed *not* to greatly alter the course of world events, but help
1) the Belgians feel a bit better about the Dutch
2) Remove some propaganda elements, overall making the Germans less the 'Evil Hun' and helping explain why WW Post-war Germany got treated different. The Year less of bleeding goes a lot further of course.

25

Wednesday, November 24th 2010, 9:12pm

Great work guys. At last a concise history of the Great War. Makes more sense now and answers those niggling questions without raising too many more.

26

Wednesday, November 24th 2010, 9:23pm

Thanks. Glad you like it!

Kaiser Kirk

Lightbringer and former European Imperialist

  • Send private message

27

Thursday, November 25th 2010, 6:15am

Quoted

Originally posted by Hood
Great work guys. At last a concise history of the Great War. Makes more sense now and answers those niggling questions without raising too many more.


What he said :)

28

Thursday, November 25th 2010, 3:22pm

Good read!

the Macedonian thing has me a bit confused though, why did Serbia declice the part it was assigned OTL to Greece in the 1st Balkan War?

As for Sikorski, he did work for Russo-Balt as chief engineer but I dont now if he lived in Riga

29

Thursday, November 25th 2010, 4:40pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad

the Macedonian thing has me a bit confused though, why did Serbia declice the part it was assigned OTL to Greece in the 1st Balkan War?



I'm a bit confused as to your question. "Declice"? or do you mean decline?

If the latter, what 'part' are you referring to?

30

Thursday, November 25th 2010, 4:45pm

Yes sorry I meant decline. Serbia was assigned "Vardar" Macedonia OTL which is clearly Greek in this timeline, so why did they turn it over to Greece?

31

Thursday, November 25th 2010, 5:20pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
Yes sorry I meant decline. Serbia was assigned "Vardar" Macedonia OTL which is clearly Greek in this timeline, so why did they turn it over to Greece?


Serbia realized that it did not have the strength to regard all the Balkan nations as enemies and decided to turn Greece from potential enemy into potential ally by not aiming too far and contenting herself with gains in Albania.

32

Thursday, November 25th 2010, 11:50pm

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by Commodore Green
I had been lead to believe by Lord Arpad (previous Iberian player) that Iberia was involved in the Great War, but I see no sign of it in your history.

I suppose it's possible; Portugal historically joined the war as part of the Entente, on the basis of their 1400s treaty with England. I've not heard any comments during my time here that so much as hinted of Iberian participation, however; therefore we all presumed when working on the timeline that Iberia remained neutral.

Do you wish for Iberia to be accorded a role in the Great War?


Not bothered really, just mentioning it.......

33

Friday, November 26th 2010, 1:14am

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
Yes sorry I meant decline. Serbia was assigned "Vardar" Macedonia OTL which is clearly Greek in this timeline, so why did they turn it over to Greece?


Serbia realized that it did not have the strength to regard all the Balkan nations as enemies and decided to turn Greece from potential enemy into potential ally by not aiming too far and contenting herself with gains in Albania.

Which makes them smarter than Bulgaria of that time period. ;)

34

Friday, November 26th 2010, 3:42am

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine

Quoted

Originally posted by BruceDuncan

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad
Yes sorry I meant decline. Serbia was assigned "Vardar" Macedonia OTL which is clearly Greek in this timeline, so why did they turn it over to Greece?


Serbia realized that it did not have the strength to regard all the Balkan nations as enemies and decided to turn Greece from potential enemy into potential ally by not aiming too far and contenting herself with gains in Albania.

Which makes them smarter than Bulgaria of that time period. ;)


It is the same logic that brought Yugoslavia to take the first steps towards a final settlement of outstanding territorial claims with Bulgaria - which, by the close of 1940 - ought to be settled.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "BruceDuncan" (Nov 26th 2010, 3:43am)


35

Friday, November 26th 2010, 4:27am

It's also, basically, why ~20yrs later Greece joined the Warsaw Pact. Like all proud people, we like to pretend we could hold our own against the rest, we knew that either the Turko-Bulgarian alliance or the PRJ would get us eventually if we went to far. This way we don't have to worry about Turkey trying to take Smyrna back, nor Serbia trying for Vardar, etc. We can all concentrate on bigger fish.

36

Friday, November 26th 2010, 5:28am

Like peace, joy, and tasty sammiches!