What if we had not entered the war?

[trenchwalker]

what if britain had said sod it lets no go to war?

thousands would live.

ten of million wouldnt die from spanish flu

the second world war wouldnt happen

there would be no russian revolution

all those young minds that could have been put to use.

[Guest Hill 60]

I don't much about the Russian Revolution (I was always being kicked out of my history class because I was 'a disruptive pupil who has no concern about world history or his fellow man'), but I would hazard a guess that it would have happened anyway.

The Czar, and his family, were out of touch with the whole of Russia and they would have been toppled sooner or later.

Could Britain have stood by and watched the German Empire become larger than their own, I don't think they could. Sooner or later Britain would have to do something so they didn't become a second rate nation.

[BeppoSapone]

Sooner or later Britain would have to do something so they didn't become a second rate nation.

But they did do something and.........

[Jonathan Saunders]

One thing for sure is that a few of us wouldnt be here now as the course of so many peoples (our predecessors) lives were changed, for better or for worse. This is something I always ponder when I get annoyed about the great loss of life.

[Guest Hill 60]

But they did do something and.........

.......we are now a second rate nation that still thinks it runs most of the World?

[Malcolm]

In the Franco- Prussian War of 1871 Britain issued a note declaring they would go to war on ' whoever violates Belgian territory ' ie France or Prussia. The Prussians invaded France and most fighting was around Sedan and Metz before they won.

If Germany had used similar tactics in 1914 we would have had no reason to get involved then.

The Treaty of 1839 was with Belgium only. However.............................. the idea of the German High Sea fleet in Brest or St Nazaire would have probably made them find a reason if the French had been in difficulties.

Of course if Blair had been in charge........................

Aye

Malcolm

[Will O'Brien]

Perhaps Britain had no real choice but to go to war & perhaps it had nothing to do with Belgian neutrality. Taken from a Political & Economic standpoint Britain could not afford Germany to become the overwhelming dominant force in continental Europe as this would threaten Britain’s position as the 'superpower' in the world (remember this is a time when a third of the atlas was covered in pink & I'm not talking trousers & Britannia really did rule the waves). Therefore any major continental war where Germany emerged victorious was bad for Britain. To stay neutral would court disaster as the French and/or Franco-Russian alliance could not be relied upon to gain victory. The only option left is to fight & marshal all the vast sources of the Empire to ensure victory.......this leads to another bone of contention.........if the above is a true reflection of what really was going through the minds of those who stalked the corridors of power, then the notion that the war would be over by Christmas was just a cover & perhaps a very cynical one. No one was going to win any wars with the size of Army that was put into the field by the British in August 1914. The BEF was just a holding measure, until such a time that a larger force could be brought to bare on the battlefield.

Simplistic I know, but possible

[CROONAERT]

In the Franco- Prussian War of 1871 Britain issued a note declaring they would go to war on ' whoever violates Belgian territory ' ie France or Prussia. The Prussians invaded France and most fighting was around Sedan and Metz before they won.

If Germany had used similar tactics in 1914 we would have had no reason to get involved then.

Malcolm.

If the Germans had used the same tactics and manouvres in 1914 that they did in 1870, the war would have been over practically before it began.

They suffered enormous casualties in the 1870 invasion as it was, and that was against single shot, breech loading rifles, mainly solid shot (though relatively quick firing) artillery and a very few early machine guns (La Mittrailleuse). Though, as you said, major battles took place around Sedan and the series of battles around Metz (Metz, Gravelotte, St.Privat, Rezonville, Mars-la-Tour), the invasion was a full scale one, with battles taking place from the German border all the way to Normandy/Brittany including the historic siege of Paris (and,possibly of interest to members of this forum, Bapaume, where the Butte de Warlencourt was involved in a different war). Mobilization within France, and many of the German Countries was full scale, as it was in Belgium in case of invasion.

The Germans learned from their (many) mistakes in this invasion and, also being mindful of the French fortification buildup on the German border of 1875(ish) onwards, the only real way was to sweep through Belgium (it always amuses me, the fact that they basically asked permission first!).

If they had done the same as in 1870 ,especially with the modernisation of weaponry, I believe they would have been massacred.(and, therefore, we'd have had no reason to get involved - same conclusion, different reason).

Dave.

[Guest paddy]

JOIN the War. I thought we s

Silly me, falling for that old "we" [good guys], "them" [ colonials germans etc,] thing again.

OK Guilty Your Honour!.

First shot fired in anger, and effectively, was from Fort Gellibrand, near Melbourne.

After all the aggro that caused, exactly the same thing happenned in 1939.

[Malcolm]

If the Germans had used the same tactics and manouvres in 1914 that they did in 1870, the war would have been over practically before it began.

They suffered enormous casualties in the 1870 invasion as it was, and that was against single shot, breech loading rifles, mainly solid shot (though relatively quick firing) artillery and a very few early machine guns (La Mittrailleuse). Though, as you said, major battles took place around Sedan and the series of battles around Metz (Metz, Gravelotte, St.Privat, Rezonville, Mars-la-Tour), the invasion was a full scale one, with battles taking place from the German border all the way to Normandy/Brittany including the historic siege of Paris (and,possibly of interest to members of this forum, Bapaume, where the Butte de Warlencourt was involved in a different war). Mobilization within France, and many of the German Countries was full scale, as it was in Belgium in case of invasion.

The Germans learned from their (many) mistakes in this invasion and, also being mindful of the French fortification buildup on the German border of 1875(ish) onwards, the only real way was to sweep through Belgium (it always amuses me, the fact that they basically asked permission first!).

If they had done the same as in 1870 ,especially with the modernisation of weaponry, I believe they would have been massacred.(and, therefore, we'd have had no reason to get involved - same conclusion, different reason).

Dave.

Very true Dave!!

Aye

Malcolm

[Geoff Parker]

I don't believe Britain went to war soley because of Belgian neutrality. There was

no way that the British Government and the Military, particularly the Navy,

would have permitted Germany to expand in Europe and threaten Britain's

trade routes. Had Germany not invaded Belgium, Britain would still have

eventually joined the war against Germany, if for nothing else than its

own protection in the future.

The Russian Revolution. I think that would have happened eventually. The

revolution was not so much against the war itself but against the Tzar and his

family. The unrest was there and unless policies had dramatically changed there

would still have been a revolution.

The Spanish Flu. I know the new theory that it was caused by poultry and pigs

being kept at Etaples. But farmers have been keeping poultry and pigs in close

proximity for centuries so how come this virus never occurred before.

As to World War Two, who knows maybe if the first war had not of occurred it

would have been called the Great War.

Just my thoughts

Geoff

[Chris_Baker]

I'm, going to try to stay with trench's question: what if Great Britain had not joined the war.

I would speculate the following:

*Germany would have defeated France on the Western Front, in 1917. Belgium and eventually possibly Netherlands and Denmark would have become Germanised dominions. France under martial law and economically stripped for reparations. Germany rebuilds the industrial capacity of France and becomes the largest economy in the world in GDP terms by the mid 1920s.

*Revolution in Russia would have occurred as it did. Germany would have been in a stronger position to exploit Brest Litovsk, and crush nationalist resistance in Poland. The Bolshevik leadership would have come to an agreement with Germany in 1920.

*The USA would not have entered the war on the Allied side. It would not have gained the balance of world financial power from London, and many individuals and companies that became world players would not have done so.

*No revolution would have been attempted in Germany in 1918-19.

*Turkey would not have attempted to increase its territory or control in the Britsih-influenced parts of the Middle East. (Threat of British power being concentrated against it). Palestine and eventually Israel would not have been created.

*Germany would eventually have defeated Italy, possibly in 1918, and at least taken control of Pula, Fiume, etc.

*Germany and Britian would have agreed a power-sharing position with regard to the colonies of Africa. Germany would have taken Belgian and French possessions there.

*Austria-Hungary would have survived but under increased German influence and control. Nationalist pressures in the Balkans would continue but there would be no creation of anything like Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia.

*The conditions created in Germany would not have led to the National Socialist party.

* There would have been no second war until a good deal later, when British economic power had dwindled as a result of loss of exports and the undiminished financial power was under threat. I would speculate that this would have been in the 1950s or 60s.

This is fun!

Having said all that I do not believe it was possible for Britain to avoid war in 1914, nor do I think it should have attempted to do so.

[Geoff Parker]

Chris

You missing out Spanish Flu

Geoff

[AndyHollinger]

Alternative History ... it's hard to have a discussion because it goes off in so many places.... Why would Italy have joined the war, if the Germans had beat up the French so badly at the very start. The Central Powers might have lost the toss forcing them to take the Italians!

The Russian Revolution: You're forgetting, of course, that if the Germans over-run France quickly, there would be no reason to let the Eastern Front hang around much either ... without Allied Support, the Romanovs - if they could get their mind in one place long enough - would have surrendered and declared victory and go back to whatever it was they were doing - oh, yes, shooting workers ... Instead of French investments turning Russia into sweat-shop heaven, it would have been German money ... A revolution would come, but who knows Marxist or merely Nationalistic ... the place dissovles into chaos similar to 2001.

Okay, another twist: Germany attacks but decides not to use Schliefflen or the Molke idea whatsoever - Willy in one of his Anglophile moments decides he can't risk is best toy Tirpitz's boats - and attacks France, headlong across the boarder ... the vaunted German Machine with reduced capability for manuver tries to out-offensive the offensively minded French and makes no ground ... the war is over by Christmas because there are no string of great victories for the German people to die defending and the Socialists in the Reichstag (remember them, one of the real reasons for the war) demand a responsibile gov't ... Willy gives in ... Or Willy says peace at the front and brings the Army home to fight in the streets ... Germany dissovles into Civil War allowing British money to once more reign supreme ...

OR

The initial German advance into France is workiing, slowly and even the desperate appeals to British Honesty by the French General Staff do not sway Haldane, Grey or Asquith ... they are neutral ... The German Fleet wants its share of the blood and begins to move into the North Sea to go around GB and the western approaches to Ireland to hit the French coast. The sight of the all those Dreadnaughts are too much for even the Liberal Cabinet and the knowledge that these would soon be ravaging the French coast to engage a much smaller French fleet makes them realise the Two power standard is worth fighting for ... The French fleet is caught somewhere off of Ireland and the battle deaths are tremendous - for the French leaving the German system unscathed but practiced ... the Grand Fleet can not let them make contact with the Continent and in a bold move swoops in from over the horizen after a pre-emptive Declaration of War ... The superior German armaments can not overcome their dissarray and damage caused by the French ... in Trafalgar like precision, they are picked to pieces by the British ... or perhaps it is the other way around ...

OR ....

I really don't think this matters much - Haldane / Grey and essentially Asquith were men of their word. Belgium provided a great and justifyable excuse to make their secret discussions and plans more palitable and immediate to the public. Wihtout delving into Masonic or Illuminati bizarre theories ... the idea of a continent dominated by the Germans and the German Fleet free to roam the coast could not have been tolerated by a British PUBLIC no less a Liberal Imperialist government.

And we haven't even started to discuss an America without the war ... no Billy Mitchell, Wilson living out his term ... no FLAPPERs

[Guest Pete Wood]

As most of the British aristocracy was wiped out, or died without heirs, I can't help but wonder about the massive loss of tax revenue - in death duties.

It follows that without a war, Britain would, by now, have needed an extension to the House of Lords.

I would also not be a member of the National Trust.........

[BeppoSapone]

Alternative History ... it's hard to have a discussion because it goes off in so many places.... Why would Italy have joined the war, if the Germans had beat up the French so badly at the very start. The Central Powers might have lost the toss forcing them to take the Italians!

IMHO if Britain had remained neutral Italy would not have been involved in WW1, unless of the German side. Italy was more or less allied with Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1914. IIRC Italy didn't enter WW1 in 1914 because their treaty said that they would help Germany/Austria-Hungary if they (Germany and A-H) were invaded/attacked. As this was not the case Italy remained neutral in 1914. However, in Berlin, "Italian Salad" was renamed "Traitors Salad".

If the Germans had offered to return to Italy their "lost provinces", of Nice and Savoy, taken from a defeated France, it is possible that Italy would still have joined in the war - on the German side.

In fact, by 1915 the Allies offered the Italians the Italian speaking areas of the Austro-Hungarian Empire if they came in to the war on the British and French side. These promises, agreed to in the "Secret Treaty of London" of 1915, were never fully realised, and the Allies ceding "Italian" areas to Yugoslavia was one of the reasons for the rise of Fascism in Italy.

In 1915 many Italians regarded the war they entered as being "finishing the work of Garibaldi". They cared little or nothing for Belgian neutrality. they hoped to liberate "Unredeemed Italy" from the Austrians.

[The_Historian]

Hi,

Let's not forget the Germans gave Lenin a free train ride to Russia to stop him starting a revolution in Germany! That's where everyone expected it to happen because they had the biggest Socialist movement in Europe pre-war.

I'm sure AJP Taylor argued years ago that in 1914, British people would have been equally in favour of fighting the Fench than the Germans, due to the fact that the Kaiser was more or less family(ish) and the fact that the French were still seen as dangerous upstarts from the napoleonic period. Hence all the "Babies-on-Bayonets" stuff to persuade the British people that the "Hun"really was beastly!

Regards,

Gordon

[Martyn Gibson]

.......we are now a second rate nation that still thinks it runs most of the World

Lee, I'm sorry that you think we are a second rate nation

Martyn