|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 17, 2023 11:05:35 GMT
Lets consider the likely course of events had Britain stood apart. September 1914 was touch and go. Without the British contribution The Germans would likely have taken Paris and defeated France. And even had they not there would have been no mass British army to support the French who are unlikely to have survived on their own. Nor any Royal Navy blockade of Germany. Germany did manage to defeat Tsarist Russia in spite of the blockade and the existence of a western front. This would have been all the more readily achieved sooner without either to worry about. The Ottoman Empire too would never have endured the knockout blow delivered by the British. In short the Central Powers would have won the war, with German hegemony on the continent. The Third Reich which was borne out of defeat would probably never have happened but Europe would have been dominated by a militaristic Prussian led Germany. They would have been free to continue building their large navy, and with the increasing development of air power would likely have dominated us too and proved an existential threat to our freedoms. Palestine would continue to have been administered by the Ottomans in the interests of the muslim majority, and Israel is highly unlikely to have come into existence. On the plus side the holocaust might not have happened and the Bolshevik revolution might not have occurred. But we are unlikely to have retained our freedom for long in the face of a German dominated continent, without having to fight for it anyway, and without the Allies we would have had in 1914. So our participation in that conflict was the least bad option. Had all that happened as it did but we had elected not to participate in the Second World War, it would have made no difference to Poland. But France without us might have bottled it and if it didnt it would have been even more easily defeated. The Germans invaded Denmark and Norway mostly to forestall us, so these countries would probably not have been attacked and remained neutral. But without a western front or war in the med to worry about Hitler could have turned his entire might eastwards and might well have delivered a knockout blow to the USSR. And without us in the war, the USA would likely not have come in against Germany and even if it did it would have had no ready base from which to launch offensives against Germany. So all would have depended on the outcome in the east. But either we would have ended up with Nazi Germany triumphant and hegemonic from the Atlantic to the Urals, or a Soviet dominated Europe. Under the circumstances prevailing the former would have been more likely but neither would have left us free and undominated, inevitably forced into becoming a de facto puppet state. The Jews of Europe would have been entirely wiped out, along with millions of Slavs, most of the rest reduced to conditions of slavery. It is also likely that without us or the USA involved, the Manhattan project might not have occurred, and the atomic age delayed for many years, possibly decades. And the existential danger in that is that a Nazi or Soviet dominated Europe might have got there first. So however bad our participation in either war was for for us economically and in terms of lives lost and property destroyed, the eventual outcome would likely have been far worse for us if we hadnt bothered. Freedom does sometimes have to be fought for, when those who would take it from us are willing to fight to try. The thing is, though, without the german defeat and the noxious terms imposed at Versailles, would there even have been the war as known to history between ‘39 and ‘45 ?? As for the impact on Britain, it is well documented that we were left in a sorry state by the ruinous cost in money and catastrophic loss of life both conflicts brought.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2023 11:55:07 GMT
Lets consider the likely course of events had Britain stood apart. September 1914 was touch and go. Without the British contribution The Germans would likely have taken Paris and defeated France. And even had they not there would have been no mass British army to support the French who are unlikely to have survived on their own. Nor any Royal Navy blockade of Germany. Germany did manage to defeat Tsarist Russia in spite of the blockade and the existence of a western front. This would have been all the more readily achieved sooner without either to worry about. The Ottoman Empire too would never have endured the knockout blow delivered by the British. In short the Central Powers would have won the war, with German hegemony on the continent. The Third Reich which was borne out of defeat would probably never have happened but Europe would have been dominated by a militaristic Prussian led Germany. They would have been free to continue building their large navy, and with the increasing development of air power would likely have dominated us too and proved an existential threat to our freedoms. Palestine would continue to have been administered by the Ottomans in the interests of the muslim majority, and Israel is highly unlikely to have come into existence. On the plus side the holocaust might not have happened and the Bolshevik revolution might not have occurred. But we are unlikely to have retained our freedom for long in the face of a German dominated continent, without having to fight for it anyway, and without the Allies we would have had in 1914. So our participation in that conflict was the least bad option. Had all that happened as it did but we had elected not to participate in the Second World War, it would have made no difference to Poland. But France without us might have bottled it and if it didnt it would have been even more easily defeated. The Germans invaded Denmark and Norway mostly to forestall us, so these countries would probably not have been attacked and remained neutral. But without a western front or war in the med to worry about Hitler could have turned his entire might eastwards and might well have delivered a knockout blow to the USSR. And without us in the war, the USA would likely not have come in against Germany and even if it did it would have had no ready base from which to launch offensives against Germany. So all would have depended on the outcome in the east. But either we would have ended up with Nazi Germany triumphant and hegemonic from the Atlantic to the Urals, or a Soviet dominated Europe. Under the circumstances prevailing the former would have been more likely but neither would have left us free and undominated, inevitably forced into becoming a de facto puppet state. The Jews of Europe would have been entirely wiped out, along with millions of Slavs, most of the rest reduced to conditions of slavery. It is also likely that without us or the USA involved, the Manhattan project might not have occurred, and the atomic age delayed for many years, possibly decades. And the existential danger in that is that a Nazi or Soviet dominated Europe might have got there first. So however bad our participation in either war was for for us economically and in terms of lives lost and property destroyed, the eventual outcome would likely have been far worse for us if we hadnt bothered. Freedom does sometimes have to be fought for, when those who would take it from us are willing to fight to try. The thing is, though, without the german defeat and the noxious terms imposed at Versailles, would there even have been the war as known to history between ‘39 and ‘45 ?? As for the impact on Britain, it is well documented that we were left in a sorry state by the ruinous cost in money and catastrophic loss of life both conflicts brought. The negative impact on Britain of our participation in both World Wars is surely not in dispute. What seems doubtful to me is that things would have been any better for us had we stayed out. Had we stayed out of the First World War the likelihood of German victory would eventually have posed an existential threat to our freedoms. We would have had to have given them up or fought for them in even worst circumstances. Whilst it is true that in that scenario the Third Reich would never have happened and Hitler would have remained a nobody, our own situation would hardly have been better due to our non-participation, but actually much worse.
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 17, 2023 12:34:28 GMT
You can't have a war of hegemonic succession if the hegemony doesn't show up. The two world wars were really one war with a 20 year intermission to replenish the manpower. Germany won in the end but they did it economically once the British Empire had been spent.
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 17, 2023 12:40:47 GMT
Another question is should we have formed a working relationship with Hitlers Germany in the early 1930s? Great Britain was a greater Naval power while Germany was more of a land military power . Could the British Empire thrive alongside the third Reich?
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Nov 17, 2023 13:59:20 GMT
You can't have a war of hegemonic succession if the hegemony doesn't show up. The two world wars were really one war with a 20 year intermission to replenish the manpower. Germany won in the end but they did it economically once the British Empire had been spent. I think '73 oil crisis hit us hard was Germany using Russian oil back then?
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Nov 17, 2023 14:12:02 GMT
You can't have a war of hegemonic succession if the hegemony doesn't show up. The two world wars were really one war with a 20 year intermission to replenish the manpower. Germany won in the end but they did it economically once the British Empire had been spent. I think '73 oil crisis hit us hard was Germany using Russian oil back then? The oil crisis hit everybody hard. I think the difference was that, thanks to the RAF, they modernised their industry much faster than we did. Their reduced military spending was probably a factor too with their best brains going into industry rather than military development. Of course it might just be they are harder working than us.
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Nov 18, 2023 7:15:31 GMT
I think '73 oil crisis hit us hard was Germany using Russian oil back then? The oil crisis hit everybody hard. I think the difference was that, thanks to the RAF, they modernised their industry much faster than we did. Their reduced military spending was probably a factor too with their best brains going into industry rather than military development. Of course it might just be they are harder working than us. I think this might be well worth a read history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/dawes#:~:text=Over%20the%20next%20four%20years,debts%20to%20the%20United%20States.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2023 11:28:06 GMT
Another question is should we have formed a working relationship with Hitlers Germany in the early 1930s? Great Britain was a greater Naval power while Germany was more of a land military power . Could the British Empire thrive alongside the third Reich? Hitler seemed to think so. But how long would we have survived as a free and independent nation with a Nazi dominated Europe on the other side of the channel? Hitler and his coterie of political gangsters would not have allowed our freedom for long. Hitler might well have admired the British Empire. But he also admired Napoleon, and look how little good that did the French. With his track record, relying on him to continue being nice to us would have been foolhardy in the extreme.
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Nov 19, 2023 15:41:11 GMT
Another question is should we have formed a working relationship with Hitlers Germany in the early 1930s? Great Britain was a greater Naval power while Germany was more of a land military power . Could the British Empire thrive alongside the third Reich? Hitler seemed to think so. But how long would we have survived as a free and independent nation with a Nazi dominated Europe on the other side of the channel? Hitler and his coterie of political gangsters would not have allowed our freedom for long. Hitler might well have admired the British Empire. But he also admired Napoleon, and look how little good that did the French. With his track record, relying on him to continue being nice to us would have been foolhardy in the extreme. Maybe but had we joined with Germany there is no reason to believe that the Nazis would have made war with France or needed to make war with the UK…afaik. We lost the British empire after the Second World War and submitted to US hegemony anyway . Had we allied with Germany there might have been Fascist alliance across Europe and into Asia .
|
|
|
Post by Baron von Lotsov on Nov 19, 2023 17:32:30 GMT
In a word, yes.
Britain's embroilment in both was in direct opposition to the principle of Splendid Isolation which had served its interests very well for a hundred years from the Congress of Vienna until 1914
As I understand it, the people of that time were doing fine and enjoying themselves. Britain was very civilised and wealthy back then, but the problem was the press. They riled up the population in a kind of Daily Mail style. All the press gave it the prim and proper right thing to do blar blar. We have seen it with so many wars since, but apparently they were the same back then, still prostitutes to paper sales.
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Nov 19, 2023 17:47:13 GMT
The Great Blunder was in becoming knitted into French strategic interests as a result of the Entente Cordiale in 1904. That became the disastrous Triple Alliance when Russia joined in 1907. None of it was a result of a public getting riled by the Daily Mail but rather the astonishing miscalculations of the political class..
This cartoon from Punch shows John Bull sloping off with the French floozy Marianne, while the Kaiser affects disinterest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2023 1:07:00 GMT
In a word, yes.
Britain's embroilment in both was in direct opposition to the principle of Splendid Isolation which had served its interests very well for a hundred years from the Congress of Vienna until 1914
With you calling yourself Dan Dare. I kind of regret not calling myself Judge Dredd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2023 1:12:29 GMT
Another question is should we have formed a working relationship with Hitlers Germany in the early 1930s? Great Britain was a greater Naval power while Germany was more of a land military power . Could the British Empire thrive alongside the third Reich? The time would have come when the only option for us would have been to fight or become a puppet state of Germany. Would have been better if we had fought earlier before Germany had grown so strong. But fighting when we did was far better than fighting later or surrendering, which sooner or later would have been the only options left to us.
|
|
|
Post by wapentake on Dec 17, 2023 1:26:45 GMT
In a word, yes.
Britain's embroilment in both was in direct opposition to the principle of Splendid Isolation which had served its interests very well for a hundred years from the Congress of Vienna until 1914
With you calling yourself Dan Dare. I kind of regret not calling myself Judge Dredd. The Mekon might’ve been better Anyway we lost our best in manpower and economically over two world wars and now those we went to war for either despise or laugh at us.
|
|
|
Post by Veronika on Apr 23, 2024 18:41:34 GMT
Dear wapentake,
You say that Britain basically lost many of its best people and it lost out so much economically as well because of the two world wars, and that Britain gets no appreciation from those countries that it saved.
This seems quite true actually, and let us face it, Britain should perhaps have simply left France to become part of Germania.
Germany just wanted its own empire, like Britain. And when you look at how things are now, Germany may as well have been allowed to at least have the European continent for itself.
Veronika Oleksychenko
|
|