|
HEY GAL posted:the guys in the top pic are arranged by height Technically height + hat size.
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
Fat Samurai posted:Technically height + hat size. silly hats are the eternal constant of milhist
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
Trumps office is staffed with people who are in bed with Russia, and so I doubt any cooperation will be as pretty as a "slam-down". Also, no one mentioned the white armies in Russia trying to put down the glorious october revolution? For shame 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes posted:Does anyone have any information on what WWI would have looked like (combat plans, technology, politics, etc.) had WWI continued into 1919? Are we talking "WWI continues because the Central Powers don't dissolve into starving revolution because [reasons]", or "WWI continues because [reasons] allow Germany to fight on alone and not dissolve into starving revolution"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Are we talking "WWI continues because the Central Powers don't dissolve into starving revolution because [reasons]", or "WWI continues because [reasons] allow Germany to fight on alone and not dissolve into starving revolution"? Either/or. Just, in general, what were the plans those involved had for what was to happen if the war dragged on?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 11:29
|
|
|
Mycroft Holmes posted:Either/or. Just, in general, what were the plans those involved had for what was to happen if the war dragged on? Lots and lots and lots of tanks, on the Allied side.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:38
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:"Civil Wars Are Actually a Really Bad Idea No Matter How Much You Don't Like the Guy" by every nation that's ever had one. Teeeechnically the US exists because of a civil war (among British citizens in the southern part of the British colonies in America). It stops being called a civil war if your aim was secession and also you win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 12:43
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Are we talking "WWI continues because the Central Powers don't dissolve into starving revolution because [reasons]", or "WWI continues because [reasons] allow Germany to fight on alone and not dissolve into starving revolution"? Without lifting the British blockade both scenarios seem incredibly unlikely. You'd need to first take out that nasty blockade as a reason, or these alternative scenarios simply won't work. Now the problem with Germany breaking the blockade is obvious: With Britain prevented from easily shipping reinforcements into France and without the blockade slowly starving Germany into submission, the war wouldn't have continued, either. Germany would have rolled over the exhausted French army and their few British friends and won, the war would have ended in Spring 1918 at the latest! So to continue the war into 1919 we need to invent some elaborate scenario were the British blockade either still exists but somehow is slightly weaker, or some other factor is crippling the German Empire instead, which is doubling the unlikeliness. We're now in the world of the Gayest, Blackest Hitler ever. (Yes I have read Castles of Steel, why do you ask?  )
Libluini fucked around with this message at 13:18 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:02
|
|
|
Well, if you look at the planning, most of the entente powers had plans for campaigns in 1919 and I believe they would have looked fairly similar to the campaigns of september and october of 1918 where the Entente forces made their successful push.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
You know, for some reason I feel like wasting a lot of time on this rather than doing what I'm supposed to be doing today. Must be something in the water. We do have a very good idea of what 1919 might have looked like on the Western Front because, while it was obvious through the second half of 1918 that the Germans were clearly struggling like they'd never struggled before, everyone had finally learned the lesson that their enemy is really resilient and so we shouldn't be lulled into thinking that they're about to run out of morale or men any time soon, no matter how ropey they look; the plans for campaign in 1919 were well advanced and they can be easily summed up as "climb into Renault FT, drive towards Berlin". At the end of September, Winston Churchill wrote a paper causing for conservation of resources until "the decisive struggles of 1920", and he was far from the only person who, not knowing the situation within Germany, could argue that the war would last that long. (Haig wrote back and told him he was full of poo poo, of course; even if you lack specialist knowledge, the percentage play is to tell Churchill he was full of poo poo.) [More to come.]
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Without lifting the British blockade both scenarios seem incredibly unlikely. You'd need to first take out that nasty blockade as a reason, or these alternative scenarios simply won't work. Treaty of Versailles with Germany at the helm would be the most amazing gay black kaiser. What were the German Empires plan anyway if they won? What were their goals for the war?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Treaty of Versailles with Germany at the helm would be the most amazing gay black kaiser. What were the German Empires plan anyway if they won? What were their goals for the war? Well, this is probably different between 1914 and 1918, but looking at what happened after the Franco-Prussian War and the terms of the Brest-Litovsk Treaty, it probably wouldn't have been pretty.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Treaty of Versailles with Germany at the helm would be the most amazing gay black kaiser. What were the German Empires plan anyway if they won? What were their goals for the war? Their goals and plans were, to simplify a bit, stupid. Brest-Litovsk went through without trouble because the war was still running, if the full war goals had been put before the Reichstag, it would have ended in revolution and Germany tearing itself apart. In the Kreuznacher Kriegszielkonferenz no-one except for Hindenburg and Ludendorff took the thing seriously. Admiral von Müller called the conference "A total excess in East and West". Chancellor Bethman Hollweg only signed the program because he saw no reason to resign over "phantasy" /"Phantastereien". Both Hollweg and Zimmermann seemed to be convinced the entire thing would just implode, even after a victory. As the end of the war came, the war goals shifted into beating down Russia even more, one of the plans floated around was tearing Russia apart into four independent Czardoms. This and other, even more fantastical plans got more and more desperate and insane the worse the situation on the Western Front looked. From a historical standpoint, they're certainly interesting, but it's only really relevant if you want to know where Hitler's idea of Lebensraum im Osten was born, to speculate about an actual hypotethical peace of a winning German Empire those last excesses are as useful as listening to dogs barking. All this poo poo is from Wikipedia, though. So even with the tons of citations and sources listed at the bottom, please take that into account. Libluini fucked around with this message at 14:38 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 14:35
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:Treaty of Versailles with Germany at the helm would be the most amazing gay black kaiser. What were the German Empires plan anyway if they won? What were their goals for the war? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septemberprogramm
In the east otoh we have the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.  Gotta love the labels on old maps. Roumania, Kieff, Esthonia, Ukrainia...
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 14:36
|
|
|
The historian George W. F. Hallgarten had some strong words about those war goals. "Orgy of Ludendorffian militarism" "a giant coalition of anarchic interests" He also calls the Kaiser "a dilettantic dreamer on the throne" because Wilhelm thought (thanks to Ludendorff's influence) that this poo poo was achievable.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Speaking of WWI, what were the Japanese up to during the war? I know they were on the Entente's side and got involved in the RCW, but that's about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:26
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Speaking of WWI, what were the Japanese up to during the war? I know they were on the Entente's side and got involved in the RCW, but that's about it. They laid siege to the German colony of Tsingtao, forcing them into surrender after a while. But the story had a good end: After WWII Tsingtao went back to China and the people living there went right back to making German beer. Allegedly it's still as good as during the time German colonial lords abused the colony as their own beer brewery.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Libluini posted:They laid siege to the German colony of Tsingtao, forcing them into surrender after a while. But the story had a good end: After WWII Tsingtao went back to China and the people living there went right back to making German beer. Allegedly it's still as good as during the time German colonial lords abused the colony as their own beer brewery. Yeah, you can still buy exported Tsingtao beer at your local Chinese restaurant. QED, War is awesome!
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
They also assisted with bottling up a mutiny in Singapore.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:44
|
|
|
They also sent like one destroyer division to the Med, which learned to ASW and got their experience ignored.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Mostly though they were in it to grab Germany's Pacific colonies. These were vital for Japan's later war plans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:57
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Mostly though they were in it to grab Germany's Pacific colonies. These were vital for Japan's later war plans. Yep, and not getting what they wanted at Versailles pushed them away from the Anglo-American alliance and then, well, we know how that went.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 16:02
|
|
HEY GAL posted:silly hats are the eternal constant of milhist 1500 to 1950, never forget the glory of these fantastic hats.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:1500 to 1950, never forget the glory of these fantastic hats. best hat in military history IMO: Aztect jaguar warrior and eagle warrior headgear. what aere other cool hat
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 16:09
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Yeah, you can still buy exported Tsingtao beer at your local Chinese restaurant. QED, War is awesome! Technically, that would have been from the colonization, not the war. Granted, the annexation of Tsingtao wasn't entirely peaceful, but it was more due to the colonists setting up a brewery to celebrate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
sullat posted:Technically, that would have been from the colonization, not the war. Granted, the annexation of Tsingtao wasn't entirely peaceful, but it was more due to the colonists setting up a brewery to celebrate. Well, war sucks then
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Well, war sucks then Absolutely nothing indeed
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:1500 to 1950, never forget the glory of these fantastic hats. Where has all the headwear gone, long time passing? Where has all the headwear gone, long time ago? Ataxerxes fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Teeeechnically the US exists because of a civil war (among British citizens in the southern part of the British colonies in America). It stops being called a civil war if your aim was secession and also you win. The "southern strategy" failed and was wrong about how many Loyalists there were.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:08
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Well, war sucks then Makes for good reading and thread material, tho
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Without lifting the British blockade both scenarios seem incredibly unlikely. You'd need to first take out that nasty blockade as a reason, or these alternative scenarios simply won't work. If the German agricultural sector was mostly low-labor high-capitol mega-farms instead small, high-labor, independent farms; I think they'd be able to last one more year under blockade before starvation. But that would require some Gay Black Hitler changes back in the 1890s and 1900s, so yeah.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:50
|
|
|
Can I request an effort post on The 602 Byzantine-Persian War, especially from Heraclius' campaign forard? I know that, ultimately, the main effect of the war was that it was one of several factors that weakened both empires enough for the soon-to-be Arab empire to crush the Sassanids and sweep the Byzantines out of the Fertile Crescent, but the war itself seems quite interesting.
Elyv fucked around with this message at 19:20 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:17
|
|
|
Teriyaki Hairpiece posted:The "southern strategy" failed and was wrong about how many Loyalists there were. By 'the southern colonies' I meant the ones that are now the US as opposed to the ones that are now Canada.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Elyv posted:Can I request an effort post on The 602 Byzantine-Persian War, especially from Heraclius' campaign forard? I know that, ultimately, the main effect of the war was that it was one of several factors that weakened both empires enough for the soon-to-be Arab empire to crush the Sassanids and sweep the Byzantines out of the Fertile Crescent, but the war itself seems quite interesting. I read a book on it, but honestly can't remember much beyond yes, it is interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Lots and lots and lots of tanks, on the Allied side. Yeah I know Britain had a shitload of tanks on order which they cut short because the war ended, flooding the front with tanks seemed to be a popular idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Yeah, you can still buy exported Tsingtao beer at your local Chinese restaurant. QED, War is awesome! It's not good, it's the Chinese equivalent of most Indian beer. Tastes like cooked broccoli, quality varies widely from bottle to bottle. The beer German emigrants started making in Mexico is good though. Negra Modelo is a perfectly decent Vienna lager.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:By 'the southern colonies' I meant the ones that are now the US as opposed to the ones that are now Canada. I got the joke, I'm saying that lack of Loyalist support was proven everywhere in the 13.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
So I keep seeing two depictions of vikings, one is fearsome top tier warriors who ran about stealing and taking from whoever, another is annoying vagabonds who basically just stole from unprotected areas of your kingdom, so you pay them off because you'd rather not spend the time or effort to deal with them. Where on this scale are they, or are both wrong and are something different?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Those two things sound exactly the same???
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 11:44 |
|
|
Also, which ones?
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:45
|
|