I've seen some persons on this forum that the Spring Offensive is destined to fail, but with the US joining ww1 as per OTL can the Germans succeed?
And if the US stays neutral?
And if the US stays neutral?
Apparently the loss of Amiens would trigger the whole collapse of the Entente war effort and other bullshit.I've seen some persons on this forum that the Spring Offensive is destined to fail, but with the US joining ww1 as per OTL can the Germans succeed?
Even if the Germans maintained their gains on the western front over the last half of 1918, their Ottoman and A-H allies are no more fighting fit than the Russians at this point. 1919 has allied armies in southern and eastern Germany no matter what is going on in France and they don't need any US troops for it.And if the US stays neutral?
Why did German soldiers, who had hitherto been so reluctant to give themselves up, suddenly begin to surrender in their tens of thousands in August 1918? The best explanation - again following Clausewitz - is that there was a collapse of morale. This was primarily due to the realization among both officers and men that the war could not be won. General Erich Ludendorff's spring offensives had worked tactically but failed strategically, and in the process had cost the Germans dear, whereas the Allied offensive of August 7-8 outside Amiens was, as Ludendorff admitted, 'the greatest defeat the German Army has suffered since the beginning of the war'. Unrestricted submarine warfare had failed to bring Britain to her knees; occupation of Russian territory after Brest-Litovsk was wasting scarce manpower; Germany's allies were beginning to crumble; the Americans were massing in France, inexperienced but well fed and numerous; perhaps most importantly, the British Expeditionary Force had finally learned to combine infantry, artillery, armour and air operations. Simply in terms of numbers of tanks and trucks, the Germans were by now at a hopeless disadvantage in the war of movement they had initiated in the spring. A German victory was now impossible, and it was the rapid spread of this view down through the ranks that turned nonvictory into defeat, rather than the draw Ludendorff appears to have had in mind. In this light, the mass surrenders described above were only part of a general crisis of morale, which also manifested itself in sickness, indiscipline and desertion.
Niall Ferguson, The War of the World: Twentieth-Century Conflict and the Descent of the West (2006), pp. 131-132
I've seen some persons on this forum that the Spring Offensive is destined to fail, but with the US joining ww1 as per OTL can the Germans succeed?
And if the US stays neutral?
There is also a question of Austria Hungary and Bulgaria. They both effectively collapsed throughout October 1918, without much US influence at all.
Therefore, even if Germany succeeds in Spring Offensive(as in: driving wedge between French Army and BEF, defeating French) it's still on timer until Autumn comes. Whether they would have found a way out of there remains unknown.
Thus, It's my opinion that Germany has to win (and by win I mean where they get an armistice on Western, Italian and Balkan fronts, shooting stops, and there's peace talks starting from there) before August 1918. This is assuming US hasn't entered the war but is still providing Entente with loans.
Unlikely but possible. Depends more on the allies cocking things up than the Germans doing things better. The veteran shocktroop factor was supposed to buckle the allied defensive lines as the Germans moved toward Amiens. It didnt but let's say the French lines collapsed or even worse, muntinied in some fashion, a la the 1917 mutinies or even Paris Commune. Amiens falls and the British and French forces are split. With Paris threatened maybe the Germans can get a White Peace with a fiat accompli understanding with Brest Livtosk. A big ask with the Americans arriving but it the French put enough pressure on the British maybe they consider it.
What was weakening them so badly, especially the Austro-Hungarians, in the second half of 1918, when they both - Ottos and Habsburgs, had been relieved of Russian pressure since March 1918, and effectively, Nov 1917, with any Russian "pressure" from Aug-Nov 1917 being only of the most pathetic, feeble kind?Even if the Germans maintained their gains on the western front over the last half of 1918, their Ottoman and A-H allies are no more fighting fit than the Russians at this point.
Sort of at odds with this:E.g. forget about Marne and Oisne, focus on Flanders and Amiens, and if that succeeds, then a push towards Compiegne from north.
Focus on defeating French over British, because if French leadership blinks, breaks down and quits, it's game over for Entente in Western Europe.
I've seen some persons on this forum that the Spring Offensive is destined to fail, but with the US joining ww1 as per OTL can the Germans succeed?
And if the US stays neutral?
What was weakening them so badly, especially the Austro-Hungarians, in the second half of 1918, when they both - Ottos and Habsburgs, had been relieved of Russian pressure since March 1918, and effectively, Nov 1917, with any Russian "pressure" from Aug-Nov 1917 being only of the most pathetic, feeble kind?
Indeed, what was weakening the Bulgarians by the second half of 1918 and September of that year, when they had not had to fight anyone seriously since giving a beatdown to the Romanians in autumn 1916, nearly two full years prior? Tanned, rested, and completely unready and outclassed - what?
Seems like the three minor CPs should have been having the "time of their lives" with multiple local enemies defeated and fronts closed down.
So, Romania just *waits* [maybe its skeptical of Allied victory, at least in 1916 or 1917, or some Allied powers- maybe Russia or Serbia, are too slow to agree to Romania’s desired territorial gains of greater Transylvania and Temesvar]. While it’s waiting, Brusilov offensive meets its culminating point and halts after the Lake Naroch failure and devastating German counterattacks in the northern sectors. Romanian entry into the war vs. CP is “on ice” through winter 1916-1917.The Allied blockade, the Central Power bloc has a whole had a calorie deficit of over 30% against peacetime demand and probably 10-15% against starvation* and shortages of pretty much every industrial input apart from coal. Winning battles doesn't matter if your family at home is starving to death. They were able to keep going until 1918 on the back of pre war stockpiles, loot** and literally eating their seed corn.
*in other words if you want everyone to get by on the bare minimum without any imports or depletion of stockpiles you need to kill 10-15% of the population. The small size of the gap between peacetime and starvation speaks to how poor much of the CP was pre war.
**Romania was a massive boon in terms of food and looting it probably extended the war by 6 months, it was actually far more useful than Ukraine to the CP as the transport network was sufficiently intact that the food could be exported to where it was needed most, the industrial cities of Germany.
If so, why didn’t the allies simply take a defensive position to wait for Germany to collapse and not bringing in American boots to get the most out of the war?The Allied blockade, the Central Power bloc has a whole had a calorie deficit of over 30% against peacetime demand and probably 10-15% against starvation* and shortages of pretty much every industrial input apart from coal. Winning battles doesn't matter if your family at home is starving to death. They were able to keep going until 1918 on the back of pre war stockpiles, loot** and literally eating their seed corn.
*in other words if you want everyone to get by on the bare minimum without any imports or depletion of stockpiles you need to kill 10-15% of the population. The small size of the gap between peacetime and starvation speaks to how poor much of the CP was pre war.
**Romania was a massive boon in terms of food and looting it probably extended the war by 6 months, it was actually far more useful than Ukraine to the CP as the transport network was sufficiently intact that the food could be exported to where it was needed most, the industrial cities of Germany.
Because the costs of keeping the war up were ruinous. No country wants to stretch things out. Plus things didn't look so good for the Entente at the beginning of 1918. Russia had been soundly defeated, Romania knocked out of the war, various failed Anglo-French offensives on the Western Front, and Italy humiliated at Caporetto. They didn't know just how bad things were on the home CP front.If so, why didn’t the allies simply take a defensive position to wait for Germany to collapse and not bringing in American boots to get the most out of the war?
And was there really no PoD in 1918 that can make Germany at least sustain to 1919? While military success doesn’t translate to food, I still fail to see how more favorable frontline and no prospect of looming defeat would somehow make them collapse earlier.
There isn't.no PoD in 1918 that can make Germany at least sustain to 1919?
Their economies were collapsing. They were basically in the same spot the Russians were. In the case of the Ottomans, prices had increased 20 fold since 1914. You can’t fight modern war without the economic ability to support it.What was weakening them so badly, especially the Austro-Hungarians, in the second half of 1918, when they both - Ottos and Habsburgs, had been relieved of Russian pressure since March 1918, and effectively, Nov 1917, with any Russian "pressure" from Aug-Nov 1917 being only of the most pathetic, feeble kind?
If so, why didn’t the allies simply take a defensive position to wait for Germany to collapse and not bringing in American boots to get the most out of the war?
Because the costs of keeping the war up were ruinous. No country wants to stretch things out. Plus things didn't look so good for the Entente at the beginning of 1918. Russia had been soundly defeated, Romania knocked out of the war, various failed Anglo-French offensives on the Western Front, and Italy humiliated at Caporetto. They didn't know just how bad things were on the home CP front.
And was there really no PoD in 1918 that can make Germany at least sustain to 1919?