Inconclusive WW1

[Rockingham]

Is it remotely plausible that WW1 effectively becomes a stalemate? For example:
-Central powers retain gains from russia and make gains in the Balkans,but Germany,Austria-Hungary and Ottoman Empire lose some territory to Britain, France, Italy, Japan and co.

-Peace treaty in 1914/15 essentialy returns to the status quo,(ie. most colonies returned, minor territorial exchanges, no real victors either way.) Probaly some guarantee to conclude the naval race, and some demilitisation

-Diplomacy by Britain or others averts escalation to fullscale conflict and return to staus quo

-Finally, a US does not enter war scenario. All remaining states were near collapse of exhaustion. So Germany holds on abit longer, maybe to 1919 or 1920, with little advancement eithway on either side. Minor but at that point containable uprisings in all powers except possibly GB, which is nonethelless starving from blockade. Maybe some agreement where Germany and co. retain gains in East and are given back everything in the West.(assuming Ottomans, Austrians and Bulgarians havent withdrawn collapsed yet) and all gains by allies are returned to central powers(except maybe Japans gains) In keeping with status Quo on the west, no war reparations on either side, but maybe a resolution between Germany and Britain, and Italy and Austria-Hungary, to end their respective naval races.

However, the war dragging on another year, without american aid, will probaly exhaust the European powers a great deal more, possibly civil war in the colonies, and earlier more succesfull independance. Germanies colonial empire eas practicaly useless, so maybe it gives its possesion commonwealth status or equivalent if they rebel... with the exception of japan though I don't think anyone would be capable or willing to buy Germanies useless colonies so soon after WW1

 

[Rockingham]

Is anyone interested? I was thinking I would possibly do this as my first timeline, makes a pleasant alternative to stereotypical central powers wank.

I prefer the last one personally, but don't know how plausible it is. It would have some interesting consequences though. Typical cliche seems to be regarding revolution, or some kind other unpleansantness in Britain proper as impossible, so I'm considering a democratized Germany by 1930 and Britain turning weimar then Fascist or equivalent. Revolutions occur in all participants though(all major european powers anyway), just depends how succesful they are. America would bear a grudge against Germany for sub warfare, be militarily pathetic as before, but relative to Europe more powerful economically then otl. No real difference to Japan, except it has more time to make a protectorate of China while Europe is distracted and exhausted. After exhustian from longer WW1, maybe only Japan and USA attempt to aid whites militarily(Europe only sent token forces otl). Communist revolutions in europe might even be ignored by the other European powers, I could see a comunist italy happening(if it had no gains fom ww1 whatsoever)

 

[Rockingham]

Another idea might be japanese americasn war, if japan doesnt withdraw 20 demands, Allies and CP remain neutral and USA IS NOT going to fight CP and japan at the same time.and so ww1 drags on, japan defeated rather quicky, but US public doesnt want to fight another war immediately after. And so, WW1 drags on.

 

[Lordkraken]

I don't think that the US would possibly go to War with Japan before Germany, who was busy torpedoing American ships. If Germany keeps on attacking US shipping, America is going to join the Allies eventually.
If the Germans refrain from attacking US ships, they lose anyway, because with uninterrupted trade with the US for the Allies, the CP's are going to starve to death alot faster the the British or French.
The only way to keep America out of the war is to have them refuse to trade with either side. And I can't think of any reason for them to do so.

 

[Rockingham]

Their was a brief period when Germany stopped bombing American ships, (1916 I think) but the Kaiser was pressured into renewing it. So the question is whether it's possible that America, secure in the "knowledge" their trade with Britain is safe, would be prepared to got to war with Japan. I'm envisioning a situation likee the one leading up to pearl harbour, with Japan occupying large parts of China. Japan refuses to drop the 20 demands, so China fights on. US applies a degree of embargoe on Japan but not war, and at the same time supplies China, as does Britain. Japan leaves Allies in retaliation, but continues to occupy german pacific islands. Of course, Allies arent prepared to fight Japan, but they also begin a degree of embargo. Japan begins the same sorts of methods against allied and american shipping bringing supplies to china as Germany has towards Britain.

Then, in the period which uncoditional bombing of ships in the channel ceases, USA declares war on Japan based on the sam reasons as it did OTL on Germany. Germany later renews blockade as it did OTL, but USA is already at war with Japan. The main question then, will USA declare on Germany as well, while its at war with Japan? If it finishes Japan of before stalemate and peace between allies and CP, will it declare war on Germany then? All that is needed is for Central powers and Western allies to be exhausted into a status quo peace before America decides to join the war on the Allies side.

 

[Rockingham]

"Admiral Sir John Jellicoe, in command of the Grand Fleet, said that if things continued to get worse Britain would have to sue for peace by the summer of 1917." a quote I found on wikpedia.
Anyway, my guess is if the Americans were already at war with Japan, they would not declare war on Japan per se, but would supply them with battleships that could used against Germanies submarine warfare, and put more effort in to supplying britain. Then they might be able to hold on until a mutual status quo peace was ageed by the 2 exhausted sides. Britain might demand Germany pay compensation to the USA for American ships sunk during the war however, and Germany might agree to it as the price of ending the war and smoothing over relations with America. Alternatively, it may allow america to keep its pacific territories sans its treaty port in china, in return for normalisation of American-German relations.

 

[Rockingham]

so is the above mentioned scenario plausible???????????????

 

[Riain]

There was too much tension to release for the war to stalemate, especially when there were many possible options to pursue, different theatres, tactics, weapons etc.

 

[bobtdwarf]

Their was a brief period when Germany stopped bombing American ships, (1916 I think) but the Kaiser was pressured into renewing it. So the question is whether it's possible that America, secure in the "knowledge" their trade with Britain is safe, would be prepared to got to war with Japan. I'm envisioning a situation likee the one leading up to pearl harbour, with Japan occupying large parts of China. Japan refuses to drop the 20 demands, so China fights on. US applies a degree of embargoe on Japan but not war, and at the same time supplies China, as does Britain. Japan leaves Allies in retaliation, but continues to occupy german pacific islands. Of course, Allies arent prepared to fight Japan, but they also begin a degree of embargo. Japan begins the same sorts of methods against allied and american shipping bringing supplies to china as Germany has towards Britain.

Then, in the period which uncoditional bombing of ships in the channel ceases, USA declares war on Japan based on the sam reasons as it did OTL on Germany. Germany later renews blockade as it did OTL, but USA is already at war with Japan. The main question then, will USA declare on Germany as well, while its at war with Japan? If it finishes Japan of before stalemate and peace between allies and CP, will it declare war on Germany then? All that is needed is for Central powers and Western allies to be exhausted into a status quo peace before America decides to join the war on the Allies side.

One problem there.... The Anglo-Japanese treaty.

America goes to war with Japan Britain declares war on the US. The Japanese were already doing commerce patrol in the Med fairly early in the war to relieve some pressure on the RN.

 

[bobtdwarf]

so is the above mentioned scenario plausible???????????????

You can get a stalemate or a status quo peace reasonably easily.

Germany continues her policy of taking out full page ads in the major American newspapers begging Americans NOT to sail on ships destined for Britain...THIS really happened IRL...and restrains her U-boat campaign to only stopping US flagged vessels at sea for an inspection for war materiel, if it is aboard the ship is sent back to port under "parole" rather then sunk. This would put the U-boats at substantially greater risk but would avoid nearly all American losses of life.

Upon the fall of the Russians and with no possibility of the US entering the war, and the CP being able to draw upon resources in the East...the Entente kites negotiations for a settlement probably after a German successful offensive in the West.

Probable results of the whole thing would be:

Naval accord between Germany and Britain following the German proposal pre war of a 3/5 scheme.

No exchanges of territory between the surviving powers. Possible dividing up between Germany and Britain of the Portuguese colonies as was in the works pre war.

The US as the only other major power that was at peace would likely be the broker of the deal and Wilson could pull out a truncated form of his 13 points...

 

[euio]

You can get a stalemate or a status quo peace reasonably easily.

Germany continues her policy of taking out full page ads in the major American newspapers begging Americans NOT to sail on ships destined for Britain...THIS really happened IRL...and restrains her U-boat campaign to only stopping US flagged vessels at sea for an inspection for war materiel, if it is aboard the ship is sent back to port under "parole" rather then sunk. This would put the U-boats at substantially greater risk but would avoid nearly all American losses of life.

Upon the fall of the Russians and with no possibility of the US entering the war, and the CP being able to draw upon resources in the East...the Entente kites negotiations for a settlement probably after a German successful offensive in the West.

Probable results of the whole thing would be:

Naval accord between Germany and Britain following the German proposal pre war of a 3/5 scheme.

No exchanges of territory between the surviving powers. Possible dividing up between Germany and Britain of the Portuguese colonies as was in the works pre war.

The US as the only other major power that was at peace would likely be the broker of the deal and Wilson could pull out a truncated form of his 13 points...

I agree.....

 

[Rockingham]

One problem there.... The Anglo-Japanese treaty.

America goes to war with Japan Britain declares war on the US. The Japanese were already doing commerce patrol in the Med fairly early in the war to relieve some pressure on the RN.

I believe I already explained that in detail. Japan didn't withdraw it's 20 demands of china, but continued to invade. Britain, if not completely withdrawing from the alliance after japan refused to listen to it's pleas, would at least continue trade with china, and at least secretly give it aid. Japan would follow the policy germany did towards ships trading with britain with british ships, as well as american ships. That would be its down fall, and Britain might even declare war... but for the purposes of this timeline that would be negative. Japanese fleet in the med would be withdrawn

 

[Rockingham]

any way is the scenario i have emntioned, with usa/japan war and world war 1 a stalemate without american entrance, plausible

 

[euio]

What if Britian keeps its alliance with Japan?

 

[Rockingham]

any way is the scenario i have emntioned, with usa/japan war and world war 1 a stalemate without american entrance, plausible

allies get thrashed, not stalemate, which is waht we want. Secondly, america would not attack unless the alliance ad ended, and i have detailed how it could have. mY QUESTION IS IS is plausible

 

[Peter Cowan]

Why would the USA go to war with Japan over China? It didn't in OTL - World War 2 was Japan attacking the USA and even after that the USA followed a Europe First strategy.

So far as WW1 is concerned. No unrestricted U Boat war means no casus belli for the USA. The Zimmerman telegram might, however, still be a factor. No U boat war also means less of a blockade of the UK.

The German peace dividend of the 1917 Russian collapse was squandered away by the Ludendorf offensives which were held, if barely, by the British, Dominion and French armies. Lack of US troops might have slowed the advance but certainly in the British sector there were few US troops so August 8th and the "Hundred Days" may still have happened much as in OTL(In the main, Pershing kept US forces together as functioning Armies rather than sending divisions around piecemeal).

Also, there were other fronts. Italy, Salonica and the Middle East, in each of which the CP collapsed in spectacular fashion. One reason Germany capitulated was that there were no spare troops to oppose Allied advances.

One thing I do suspect is that absent the USA, any peace settlement would be far harsher than Versailles but that, as they say, is a different story.

 

[Homer]

You can get a stalemate or a status quo peace reasonably easily.

Germany continues her policy of taking out full page ads in the major American newspapers begging Americans NOT to sail on ships destined for Britain...THIS really happened IRL...and restrains her U-boat campaign to only stopping US flagged vessels at sea for an inspection for war materiel, if it is aboard the ship is sent back to port under "parole" rather then sunk. This would put the U-boats at substantially greater risk but would avoid nearly all American losses of life.

Upon the fall of the Russians and with no possibility of the US entering the war, and the CP being able to draw upon resources in the East...the Entente kites negotiations for a settlement probably after a German successful offensive in the West.

Probable results of the whole thing would be:

Naval accord between Germany and Britain following the German proposal pre war of a 3/5 scheme.

No exchanges of territory between the surviving powers. Possible dividing up between Germany and Britain of the Portuguese colonies as was in the works pre war.

The US as the only other major power that was at peace would likely be the broker of the deal and Wilson could pull out a truncated form of his 13 points...

What happens in the East? As Russia is already out, I suppose the Germans would gain substantial territories - although maybe not as much as in the Brest-Litovsk.

Therefore we'd have a Germany fully intact gaining territories and colonies, France wins nothing - yet is severely damaged by the war - Britain lost many men - and won parts of Mocambique and Angola. If you ask me, this is pretty much a "Germany wins" scenario - which actually would be the case with almost any WWI which ends in a stalemate: When Germany stays intact, it's by far better off than OTL, once the revolution begins in Russia Germany is better off than Russia, too.

And then there's Austria-Hungary, which would, once falling appart, lead to a substantial German expansion (probably Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and Slovenia, plus the Balkans as an economic "backyard").

 

[Rockingham]

Why would the USA go to war with Japan over China? It didn't in OTL - World War 2 was Japan attacking the USA and even after that the USA followed a Europe First strategy.

So far as WW1 is concerned. No unrestricted U Boat war means no casus belli for the USA. The Zimmerman telegram might, however, still be a factor. No U boat war also means less of a blockade of the UK.

The German peace dividend of the 1917 Russian collapse was squandered away by the Ludendorf offensives which were held, if barely, by the British, Dominion and French armies. Lack of US troops might have slowed the advance but certainly in the British sector there were few US troops so August 8th and the "Hundred Days" may still have happened much as in OTL(In the main, Pershing kept US forces together as functioning Armies rather than sending divisions around piecemeal).

Also, there were other fronts. Italy, Salonica and the Middle East, in each of which the CP collapsed in spectacular fashion. One reason Germany capitulated was that there were no spare troops to oppose Allied advances.

One thing I do suspect is that absent the USA, any peace settlement would be far harsher than Versailles but that, as they say, is a different story.

Does anyone actually read what ive written? I explained it
They went to war for the same reason they went to war against germany otl, japan was using u-boats and bombing US ships (to stop them aiding china, who they were at war with). The germans had briefly stopped attacking US ships, and after the american japanese war started would start doing so again. By then it was to late for the USA to pullout.

 

[Rockingham]

What happens in the East? As Russia is already out, I suppose the Germans would gain substantial territories - although maybe not as much as in the Brest-Litovsk.

Therefore we'd have a Germany fully intact gaining territories and colonies, France wins nothing - yet is severely damaged by the war - Britain lost many men - and won parts of Mocambique and Angola. If you ask me, this is pretty much a "Germany wins" scenario - which actually would be the case with almost any WWI which ends in a stalemate: When Germany stays intact, it's by far better off than OTL, once the revolution begins in Russia Germany is better off than Russia, too.

And then there's Austria-Hungary, which would, once falling appart, lead to a substantial German expansion (probably Austria, Bohemia, Moravia and Slovenia, plus the Balkans as an economic "backyard").

I explained that above, if you actually read it, germany keeps east, nothing changes in the west.

Id prefer it if portugals empire wasn't partitioned, they were brits ally, and full intact so it wouldn't happen unless civil war or they sold them.

 

[Rockingham]

is it plausible