Preoccupied America, Central Powers Victory

Delvestius · Dec 3, 2013

This is my first post-1900 TL idea. The P.o.D is America didn't enter WWI because we became entangled with a second war with Mexico. I know about the Zimmerman note, however I would say if our military was already fully commited to Mexico, we wouldn't want to broaden the conflict. By the time we could, the war would be over.

Any feedback is greatly appreciated.

Rush Tarquin · Dec 3, 2013

Lots of questions. What's going on with Peru/Paraguay/Bolivia? And Colombia/Venezuela/Ecuador too I guess? A-H took Congo? Wasn't Germany eyeing that? Portugal agreed to that Angola/Namibia swap? What happened with the Alaska border? How did this neo-Kalmar Union come about?

Dunbar · Dec 3, 2013

The Franco-Belgian union looks very impossible

Helios Ra · Dec 3, 2013

To start, why would Germany annex parts of Austria?

jeckl · Dec 3, 2013

Africa is wrong.

There is no way, short of invading the UK, which would be very difficult for Germany to do, that Germany would GAIN anything outside of Europe.

BBadolato · Dec 3, 2013

Why would Japan take Manchuria and why would Germany tolerate a Communist Russia?

TRH · Dec 3, 2013

Why are the Turks in the Sudan? Also, why did Austria annex Bulgaria? They were supposed to be allies, and Vienna had enough Slavs to govern already.

St. Just · Dec 4, 2013

Why are both West and East Prussia and Posen not in German colors? They would not have been given to Poland...

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

Dunbar said:
The Franco-Belgian union looks very impossible

They both got pwnt by Germany, they both fell Communist together.

Rush Tarquin said:
Lots of questions. What's going on with Peru/Paraguay/Bolivia?

It's an experimental monetary union with tendencies towards socialism in response to Colombia.

Rush Tarquin said:
And Colombia/Venezuela/Ecuador too I guess?

Columbia got a whiff if American Imperialism and took advantage of Venezuela's poor economy. Ecuador was more afraid of socialism than Colombia.

Rush Tarquin said:
A-H took Congo? Wasn't Germany eyeing that?

A convenient buffer between British East Africa.

EDIT: Nevermind, I was way off with Africa.. I have to reevaluate that theater, especially in the East.

Rush Tarquin said:
Portugal agreed to that Angola/Namibia swap?

That was just poor memory on my part.

Rush Tarquin said:
What happened with the Alaska border?

Burly American miner pioneers backed by shrewd diplomacy.

Rush Tarquin said:
How did this neo-Kalmar Union come about?

A monetary-military entity, definitely about socialism.

Helios Ra said:
To start, why would Germany annex parts of Austria?

Most prominently for connection to Trieste, which has become one of the largest ports in the world. Beside, Germans felt fine being apart of Germany, and at this point Vienna was fine with being on the border. Just, not in the border..

jeckl said:
Africa is wrong.

There is no way, short of invading the UK, which would be very difficult for Germany to do, that Germany would GAIN anything outside of Europe.

Lol you're silly.

Russians quit, no America to back up Allies, France gets steamrolled.

They're lucky all Wilhelm took was Lorraine.

EDIT: I can meet you halfway, I was planning on reevaluating British & Portuguese concessions. Pretty much all they get from the U.K. is the Solomon Islands and the rest of New Guinea. The Ottomans however are a different story.

EDIT: This next map edit is going to have much more of a British presence in Africa.

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

Changes are already in the Works.. Serbia, Greece and Bulgaria will be a tri-country puppet entity so act as a buffer between Austria and the Ottomans. to be fair, there were elements to progressive nationalism on the part of both the empires (who honestly felt like they were bursting at the seems), but nations with long histories seldom forget them and buffer the buffer states were welcomed.

Ukraine however should be in the hands of Austria, via Brest Litovsk. Up to the Crimea.

EDIT: Not Serbia.. Albania.

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

BBadolato said:
Why would Japan take Manchuria and why would Germany tolerate a Communist Russia?

The Soviets were early to convince the Manchu elite to take control from the nubile democracy. The Japanese were not apt to let that happen. Since they 'rescued' Manchuria, they declared exclusive trade rights. I might draw a thin green line around it...

TRH said:
Why are the Turks in the Sudan? Also, why did Austria annex Bulgaria? They were supposed to be allies, and Vienna had enough Slavs to govern already.

They would definitely opt to control the Muslim regions, but the U.K. should retain South Sudan. The north part is effectively controlled by the Egyptian Autonomous zone anyways.

Tsar Gringo said:
Why are both West and East Prussia and Posen not in German colors? They would not have been given to Poland...

Good call, I forgot how large Germany actually was

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

the power level of Germany is massive...

Dunbar · Dec 4, 2013

In a Germany wins ww1 scenario there's way Germany is going to let France form a union with Belgium. IMHO there's no way Belgium exists as more than a German puppet state if they win WW1

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

Dunbar said:
In a Germany wins ww1 scenario there's way Germany is going to let France form a union with Belgium. IMHO there's no way Belgium exists as more than a German puppet state if they win WW1

If Germany tried anything, there would be waves of Communist revolutions across Eastern Europe.

Urcea · Dec 4, 2013

Delvestius said:
If Germany tried anything, there would be waves of Communist revolutions across Eastern Europe.

The proletariat doesn't really necessarily respond to diplomatic posturing

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

Spelf said:
The proletariat doesn't really necessarily respond to diplomatic posturing

The proletariat do what the intelligentsia tells them to do. Germany is in an incredibly strong position, but there's no way the Germanys would be able to hold on to the their empires with the Soviets on the other side. They reds would be pressing the anti-Imperialist agenda essentially, and it would work perfectly.

Urcea · Dec 4, 2013

Delvestius said:
The proletariat do what the intelligentsia tells them too. Germany is in an incredibly strong position, but there's no way the Germanys would be able to hold on to the their empires with the Soviets on the other side. They'd be pressing the anti west agenda essentially, and it would work perfectly.

I think you give the Vanguard a little bit too much credit.

"Let's revolt!"

"Why?"

"Because Germany is invading some place we've never been!"

"WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE COMRADES"

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

Spelf said:
I think you give the Vanguard a little bit too much credit.

"Let's revolt!"

"Why?"

"Because Germany is invading some place we've never been!"

"WORKERS OF THE WORLD UNITE COMRADES"

I have enough confidence in Red propaganda that combined with the situation in France and Italy, and given the number of people able to be rallied, that revolts within the Central powers will start the Second Great War ITTL. It's been four years, the Reds would start to have things in motion by now.

Urcea · Dec 4, 2013

Delvestius said:
I have enough confidence in Red propaganda that combined with the situation in France and Italy, and given the number of people able to be rallied, that revolts within the Central powers will start the Second Great War

Well, I mean it's possible despite my teasing, as revolutions did tend to occur often and in lots of places during the period, I'm just not 100% convinced. But, since it's your scenario, I'll trust your judgment on this one

Delvestius · Dec 4, 2013

Spelf said:
Well, I mean it's possible despite my teasing, as revolutions did tend to occur often and in lots of places during the period, I'm just not 100% convinced. But, since it's your scenario, I'll trust your judgment on this one

The next map will be much more balanced.