WesWorld

January 1st

On this day, the territory of the Southern Dodrudja which was gained by Romania in the Second Balkan War was returned to Bulgaria. Contrary to the celebrations occuring on the Bulgarian side of the border, the day was a day of protests, the most notable being the march on Bucharest by veterans of the forementioned war. They were met by Prime Minister Duca who asked the crowd if they were just as eager to fight the Bulgarian devils again over a useless piece of ground. The crowd dispersed peacefully.

So..any war dead buried in that worthless piece of ground ?

That should raise morale especially when called to die for another worthless piece of land...

As well as reminding the veterans that they truly fought and their compatriots died for nothing.

Probably a lot of both sides.

This particular piece of ground has a bit of history. In OTL, Bulgaria, Serbia, Montenegro and Greece fought the first Balkan War against Turkey. The Serbs and Bulgarians made a pre-war deal about who got what territory. As the Bulgarians were more involved defeating the Turkish Army than conquering actual territory, they didn't occupy all of "their" territory before the war ended. After the fighting was done, Bulgaria asked Serbia to withdraw from the Bulgarian-assigned territories, and the Serbians refused.

Similarly, the Bulgarians bribed the Romanians to give them the fortress of Silistra to keep them neutral in the first war; with Bulgaria victorious Tsar Ferdinand got greedy and reneged on the deal. Twice.

I should note here that Tsar Ferdinand had something of a tendency to aim further than he could reach; when the Bulgarian Army looked ready to conquer Constantinople, Ferdinand prepared a full ceremony so he could be crowned King of Constantinople. The Russians informed him promptly that if he conquered Constantinople, then they'd attack Bulgaria. Ferdinand persisted but the Bulgarian Army was (probably fortuitously for them) defeated by the Turks at Chataldja.

So as soon as the First Balkan War was over, the Greeks and Serbians settled their differences, and grabbed the Romanians to join them; so when Bulgaria attempted to occupy the ground they'd been promised in Macedonia, well, you can imagine what happened. The Dobruja here was the slice of Bulgaria that Romania took in the postwar treaties.

Of course, this led to Bulgaria entering World War One on the side of the Central Powers - they really wanted to get revenge on Serbia, after all. The Bulgarians didn't do too badly in the actual fighting - they fought off the Romanians, the Greeks, the Serbians, the French, and the British. They got a lot of German help - in fact the Bulgarian armies fell under the command of Erich von Falkenhayn - but eventually Bulgaria couldn't take any more, and quit the war. And Dobruja, which was captured again by Bulgaria in the war, returned again to Romania by the peace treaty.

In the run-up to WWII, the Germans and Russians both got annoyed with the Romanians, and backed Hungarian and Bulgarian territorial demands. With no real help, the Romanians caved and handed over Dobruja to Bulgaria and Northern Transylvania to Hungary. Post-war, Bulgaria is notable for being the only Axis-aligned country to increase it's prewar borders - because Bulgaria kept Dobruja, rather than returning it (yet again) to Romania.

This actually brings Bulgaria to its modern (IOTL) borders.

Tsar Ferdinand, fortunately, is no longer in control of Bulgaria - though I should point out that I believe he's still alive. Tsar Boris, Ferdinand's son, was much less unstable than his father, and he restrained a lot of the Bulgarians' demands to reconquer territories by force. Even as a member of the Axis, he refused to declare war on Russia, which lasted until his death in 1943 - probably poisoned at Hitler's order.

What i was commenting on was the wording in describing Dobruja and the worth of sacrifices in the 2nd Balkan and First World War.

- Your fathers died for the worthless Dobruja so now we will send you to die in the Banat...

There aren't any Romanian combat casualities from the Second Balkan War, mainly because the Romanians and Bulgarians didn't fight any major battles, and with the Great War ending early i'd expect there to be less casualties from that conflict as well.

Romania isn't too concerned about the territory, although the same could not be said about Transylvania. If the Bulgarians start treating the 100,000 Romanians who live there badly, well Romania will take the matter to the LoN. Besides, the lower Danube is a much more defensible border.

I've actually considered making the case that Bulgaria stayed out of the Great War after a tougher Second Balkan War. There was some discussion when Bulgaria became a player country; and it was determined that the Treaty of Neuilly was either abrogated by Bulgaria or lifted by the victors around the mid-1920s. And from what I can see, it's true that Romania and Bulgaria didn't fight much in the Second Balkan War - the Bulgarians left their northern border undefended to try to defeat the Greek and Serbian armies, and the Romanians took it largely unopposed.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
Romania isn't too concerned about the territory, although the same could not be said about Transylvania. If the Bulgarians start treating the 100,000 Romanians who live there badly, well Romania will take the matter to the LoN.

...when did Bulgaria acquire TRANSYLVANIA???

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
There aren't any Romanian combat casualities from the Second Balkan War, mainly because the Romanians and Bulgarians didn't fight any major battles, and with the Great War ending early i'd expect there to be less casualties from that conflict as well.

Romania isn't too concerned about the territory, although the same could not be said about Transylvania. If the Bulgarians start treating the 100,000 Romanians who live there badly, well Romania will take the matter to the LoN. Besides, the lower Danube is a much more defensible border.

WWTL ?

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
I've actually considered making the case that Bulgaria stayed out of the Great War after a tougher Second Balkan War. There was some discussion when Bulgaria became a player country; and it was determined that the Treaty of Neuilly was either abrogated by Bulgaria or lifted by the victors around the mid-1920s. And from what I can see, it's true that Romania and Bulgaria didn't fight much in the Second Balkan War - the Bulgarians left their northern border undefended to try to defeat the Greek and Serbian armies, and the Romanians took it largely unopposed.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
Romania isn't too concerned about the territory, although the same could not be said about Transylvania. If the Bulgarians start treating the 100,000 Romanians who live there badly, well Romania will take the matter to the LoN.

...when did Bulgaria acquire TRANSYLVANIA???

That would certainly explian why Atlantean/Bulgarian relations are much better than Atlantean/Turkish relations. There wouldn't be any lingering animosity from the war.

Quoted

Originally posted by Brockpaine
I've actually considered making the case that Bulgaria stayed out of the Great War after a tougher Second Balkan War. There was some discussion when Bulgaria became a player country; and it was determined that the Treaty of Neuilly was either abrogated by Bulgaria or lifted by the victors around the mid-1920s. And from what I can see, it's true that Romania and Bulgaria didn't fight much in the Second Balkan War - the Bulgarians left their northern border undefended to try to defeat the Greek and Serbian armies, and the Romanians took it largely unopposed.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
Romania isn't too concerned about the territory, although the same could not be said about Transylvania. If the Bulgarians start treating the 100,000 Romanians who live there badly, well Romania will take the matter to the LoN.

...when did Bulgaria acquire TRANSYLVANIA???

It hasn't to my knowledge, but it was Hungarian territory until the Romanians took it from them during the Great War. Basically if we ever decide to give Hungary to a player, im saying im not going to do the same type of deal.

And to answer Vuk's query, the lack of Romanian casualties in the Second Balkan War is OTL, while the less casualties in the Great War is WWTL.

Quoted

Originally posted by thesmilingassassin
That would certainly explian why Atlantean/Bulgarian relations are much better than Atlantean/Turkish relations. There wouldn't be any lingering animosity from the war.

Right. All of Bulgaria's current borders can be explained by the Second Balkan War; and a Neuilly-like treaty at the end of that war could have expired in the mid-1920s. If Bulgaria stayed out of WWI, then Romania in turn would have suffered far less at the hands of Falkenhayn, and Turkey would have suffered more (as shown in the postwar boundaries) at the hands of Greece and the Allies.

I'm mainly working off the fact that Neuilly was dropped in WW in the mid 1920s, where in OTL it stuck around until 1938. Not even Germany got off that easily.

Quoted

And to answer Vuk's query, the lack of Romanian casualties in the Second Balkan War is OTL, while the less casualties in the Great War is WWTL.

Even if they werent heavy by WW1 stanadrds Romania still lost ~2000 in the 2nd Balkan War OTL

I can go with that, seeing as it affects Romania as well.

The main problem with Romania in the OTL Great War was although they had a decent sized army, they had to fight on three fronts.

Is there some kind of timeline for the Great War? Because the Atlantean intervention in 1916 does have the possibility of changing a bunch of things.

Quoted

Originally posted by Vukovlad

Quoted

And to answer Vuk's query, the lack of Romanian casualties in the Second Balkan War is OTL, while the less casualties in the Great War is WWTL.

Even if they werent heavy by WW1 stanadrds Romania still lost ~2000 in the 2nd Balkan War OTL

And from what ive read they were all from a chlorea outbreak, not combat.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
And from what ive read they were all from a chlorea outbreak, not combat.

Agreed again. I've never seen anything regarding a Bulgarian versus Romanian battle during the Second Balkan War; I've only seen Serbia-vs-Bulgaria or Greece-vs-Bulgaria battles. Now, the Bulgarians and Romanians did fight quite heavily during World War One, when the Romanians chose the poorest time to enter on the Allied side, and they simply were run over.

Quoted

Originally posted by TheCanadian
I can go with that, seeing as it affects Romania as well.

The main problem with Romania in the OTL Great War was although they had a decent sized army, they had to fight on three fronts.

Is there some kind of timeline for the Great War? Because the Atlantean intervention in 1916 does have the possibility of changing a bunch of things.

I'm not certain a timeline was ever firmly decided. Everything I've seen is that the war starts as historical; the British were defeated in the Gallipoli campaign (as historical) but the Greeks and Atlanteans came back and did the job right.

If Bulgaria remained neutral, then the Ottomans never had a land connection to the rest of the Central Powers, and they'd have folded up easier under the Gallipoli campaigns as well as Megiddo and the Middle Eastern campaigns. Romania would have gotten battered, but a neutral Bulgaria would mean they didn't get as battered before Russia pulls out of the war - by which point the Allies are probably retaking Serbia, and they can have help overland from France and Britain, and through the recently-conquered Byzantium and Black Sea from Atlantis.

Even if there were no major battles there was still fighting.
Some heavy Turco-Bulgarian fighting as well.

If Bulgaria didnt enter the WW1 Austro-Hungary and Germany would have a far tougher war in the Balkans, no Bulgarian army to attack the Serbs in the rear and no Turkish aid in the Romanian campaign.

I'm just saying, historically there weren't many casualties for the Romanian-Bulgarian section of the Second Balkans War; and with what's happened in the timeline, I can make a fairly solid case that Bulgaria did NOT join the Central Powers during the Great War. It's a theory for discussion, that's all.

The 2nd Balkan Wars peace terms would have to have been significantly harder as well to explain the greater territorial losses compared to OTL