I think the plan failed because of Verdun's server lag
@logic7327
8 жыл бұрын
Lmao
@zolamastrike
8 жыл бұрын
Probably
@camtheram3514
8 жыл бұрын
lol
@jenlennon6614
8 жыл бұрын
well to be fair the update just came out soo.....Germany didn't have a chance
@remembertotakeshowerspleas355
8 жыл бұрын
I just came from a Super Bunnyhop video on the subject. Craaaazy.
@TheGreatWar
9 жыл бұрын
A great episode! Thanks a lot Cody, it was great fun working with you. We can't wait for part 2!
@YugoslavianHeroes1943Channel
9 жыл бұрын
you're channel is great! I just found it.
@TheGreatWar
9 жыл бұрын
+YugoslavianHeros 1943 Thank you and welcome!
@AlternateHistoryHub
9 жыл бұрын
+The Great War Thanks! Your episode was fantastic! It was fun working with you too!
@YugoslavianHeroes1943Channel
9 жыл бұрын
AlternateHistoryHub hey can you post more? I love ur channel too!
@yogsothoth7594
9 жыл бұрын
+The Great War One little error I think should be mentioned is that when you mentioned the victorious central powers you showed the Ottoman empire. Now had the war been a few month I doubt the empire would really be involved and I think the ottoman empire would be seen as a backwards empire that couldn't be counted as one of the great semi western powers. Also I think that he British empire would still jump on the band wagon and grab a piece of the pie when the Ottoman empire collapse. It's nice to see my two favourite history channels working together. What next you and extra credits going to do a joint video.
@dontejones1092
8 жыл бұрын
What if WW1 was the war that ended all wars?
@SideStrafed
8 жыл бұрын
we wouldn't be here?
@shaywright6608
8 жыл бұрын
what do you mean?
@shaywright6608
8 жыл бұрын
we wouldn't be at war?
@mrelephant2283
8 жыл бұрын
+Dauntless Assassin he means that after WW1 there was never a war ever again
@comradebear_ro2126
8 жыл бұрын
think about population
@shanweeboy
6 жыл бұрын
"Fortunately once the Archduke Franz Ferdinand was assassinated.." What words to take out of context.
@akillermelon
5 жыл бұрын
Yes
@ahmedabbas5652
5 жыл бұрын
u and i
@RudolfMaster.
4 жыл бұрын
ww1 germany: Defeats russia and loses to france ww2 germany: Defeats france and loses to russia
@jacky663
4 жыл бұрын
Ww3: allies with russia, defeats france & looses to (not yet existing) austria 2
@wolfy1398
4 жыл бұрын
no it's ww1 germany: 40 km form paris ww2 germany: 40 km from moscow ww3 germany: 40 km from washington
@DawPlayGamesPL
4 жыл бұрын
ww1: loses to USA ww2: loses to USA
@wolfy1398
4 жыл бұрын
@@DawPlayGamesPL ww3: wins agains usa
@DawPlayGamesPL
4 жыл бұрын
@@wolfy1398 A decent plottwist
@ccswelding1599
8 жыл бұрын
at least Indy's hair survived the cross over
@rataide99
8 жыл бұрын
Ikr
@sonnydog830
7 жыл бұрын
CCs Welding Hell yee
@RRW359
8 жыл бұрын
So, the Schlieffen Plan was basically Blitzkrieg but without aircraft or tanks?
@bingoater6550
8 жыл бұрын
RRW no, Blitzkrieg is more complicated than just fast warfare. If your interested go read it up online.
@arvidalexatsinch1163
8 жыл бұрын
RRW Those are very important to accomplish Blitzkrieg, the combination of vehicles and aircraft, tanks and ground forces coordinating a full on assault and never looking back. But it may have been influenced by the Stoßtrupp and small German units in ww1 who were very light, fast and very strong with as many grenades as they could carry.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
As someone who doesn't know about German soldiers, I'm currently imagining a bunch of mad naked blonde guys, with bandoliers of stick grenades, just charging across no mans land.
@arvidalexatsinch1163
8 жыл бұрын
sm901ftw Lol not exactly that but you get the idea
@king10foxthefox64
7 жыл бұрын
I'm scarred for life
@jplabs456
4 жыл бұрын
‘I don’t want to oversimplify this scenario.’ This enraged OverSimplified, who punished Cody severely.
@qsummerss
3 жыл бұрын
Which led to more economic downturn
@mariansabrdella6588
2 жыл бұрын
@@qsummerss economic downturn? There’s a tax for that!
@rinopro5556
2 жыл бұрын
Taxing people for economic downturn? TO THE GUILLOTINE
@zawarudo1161
2 жыл бұрын
@@mariansabrdella6588 thats anti-revolutionaty. To the guilleotine.
@victorfischer6176
2 жыл бұрын
@@zawarudo1161 Dude, Uncool.
@noahlonaker2668
8 жыл бұрын
What If America joined the central powers?
@taureaurouge3315
8 жыл бұрын
Noah Lonaker The Allies would be back attacked and would lose.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
The Ententes navies would make that pretty difficult to do. America's fleet was better than it used to be, but Britains Navy was still stronger at the time, and the German fleet was locked up in port for a lot of the war. Crossing the Atlantic with enough troops to properly invade would be very hard to do.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
Personally I think the bigger problem would be the war between Canada and the US. Canadian troops and supplies bound for the western front would be kept home to hold off the US.
@taureaurouge3315
8 жыл бұрын
sm901ftw But by then, America would have far much more supplies, then would be able to raid Canada of any extra supplies, so they could take on the British navy.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
Why would the US have more supplies if they joined the Central powers? The British were already seizing most cargo bound between the US and Germany IOTL, so it's not like trade with them would help much. And any supplies they gain by raiding/conquering Canada would be worth far less, in the short term, than the US would spend actually fighting Canada. By the time the US had beaten Canada, prepared its forces and built up its fleet enough to challenge the Royal Navy, theres a good chance the war in Europe would already be over one way or the other. If the Entente won the isolationist US isn't going to bother fighting the British and French on its own for no benefit. However the US would hurt the Entente by denying it a big trading partner and US/Canadian troops.
@lordAlrubaie
8 жыл бұрын
The Schleifen plan did succeed, we called that WW2
@garybusey5796
8 жыл бұрын
+lord alrubaie the Germans knew that the allies would expect them to go through belgium again. So, they sent a small force to distract them and make them bring all their forces up to the line only to have the main army go behind them and force the allied armies to Dunkirk. Love ya
@Nugcon
6 жыл бұрын
yet they still lost
@TheRichardSpearman
5 жыл бұрын
Germany/Prussia defeated France in a few weeks in the 1870 war, and in 1940. Only in 1914 did the war become one of protracted trench warfare - could this have been avoided by a top calibre general on either side?
@ryoushii
5 жыл бұрын
Interesting, except Britain was already an ally of France and Russia by 1914 in all but name, because of Germany's rapid naval expansion program which was seen in Britain as a mortal threat pushed the British into French and Russian arms. There were already agreements and understandings between these countries in case of German aggression. All Belgium did was provide a noble figleaf to cover British imperial interests.
@ryoushii
5 жыл бұрын
@@TheRichardSpearman possibly. The main problem.with their plan was not British intervention, that was likely anyway for numerous other reasons, it was they never committed to it and in fact weakened their western armies because of largely ridiculous fears of Russian invasion. The Germans stripped 4 corps from The west to send east, even though two of them never saw combat before The Russians were crushed at Tannenburg. Those troops might have been the slight edge needs to defeat the French and the British before Paris, and at least temporarily destabilize the western front. Unlike WWII, I doubt France would have collapsed and would have fought on as they did after Paris was encircled and much of northern France was occupied during the Franco Prussian War But it would have put the allies way back.
@sprayandpray665
8 жыл бұрын
What if Napoleon never decide to invade Russia.
@CaptainHaddocck
8 жыл бұрын
+Spray And Pray good idea
@sprayandpray665
8 жыл бұрын
Those are two different things.
@shaywright6608
8 жыл бұрын
+TwinsPlay Tekkit yea like he said that's 2 different things not coming into power is not coming into power, not invading Russia is building up power and not losing power
@Edax_Royeaux
8 жыл бұрын
Russia was not the devastating defeat for Napoleon as everything thinks it is. Napoleon was able to rebuilt the Grande Armee up to it's former strength right afterwards, the only problem is that Napoleon so tapped the available manpower, that he was not able to replenishes any losses, and the epic Battle of Leipzig was not a decisive victory for the French.
@jaybe9627
8 жыл бұрын
Which can be traced from invading Russia.
@rayzedark1353
7 жыл бұрын
The great war AND alternate historyhub? *THEORIST BONER*
@ncrveteranranger9126
6 жыл бұрын
RaYze dark ikr
@kingofdragons1143
6 жыл бұрын
Just need MatPat
@AE_AnarchistAlexcianEmpire69Bi
4 жыл бұрын
@RaYze dark Game Theory: History Edition
@sanjarsocool
4 жыл бұрын
Taking going to “the hub” on a whole new level
@Another_Caesar
9 жыл бұрын
The Great War channel needs more subs. It's amazing.
@TheGreatWar
9 жыл бұрын
+aSecondCaesar Thanks a lot!
@1234kalmar
9 жыл бұрын
I'm just starting to learn history on my countries best university in the field! Thanks for the resources and chance to get more knowledge!
@kingofthings7929
8 жыл бұрын
Amen to that. This video lead me to that channel and I'm ever so glad I saw it.
5 жыл бұрын
"The Schlieffen Plan did not account for one thing: Ameri... just kidding". That made my day.
@ccswelding1599
8 жыл бұрын
no communist russia, since germany wouldn't have had to send lenin back to start trouble
@deltoroperdedor3166
6 жыл бұрын
CCs Welding Germany's defeat in WW1 was the worst mistake in history
@finnbazz6315
9 жыл бұрын
What if the Irish Famine never happened
@finnbazz6315
9 жыл бұрын
JFK wouldn't be president of the U.S that's a fact
@amaethon2117
9 жыл бұрын
We would be living on Mars
@mrbitey123
9 жыл бұрын
I'd love that
@CCCuniverse
9 жыл бұрын
YES
@walikoniks4309
9 жыл бұрын
+Colic Shark What if Poland lost to the Bolsheviks in 1920 ?
@mrk45
9 жыл бұрын
If it vas successful, zen ve voot prrrrrrobably all be typink in Cherman accents.
@oscarrodenburg7078
9 жыл бұрын
+Mr K Das wäre furchtbar, nicht? ;)
@mikebrow6259
9 жыл бұрын
+Mr K Ja uberdeutchland uber alles!
@bismarck1054
9 жыл бұрын
I'm of German descent btw 😃
@vznquasi5146
9 жыл бұрын
+Born2Rock Gamer me too
@iiiiitsmagreta1240
9 жыл бұрын
+Mr K aksents
@jplabs456
5 жыл бұрын
Quick recap of why Schlieffen failed: -Trench warfare -Russia was nearly fully mobilised when Germany invaded France
@DawPlayGamesPL
4 жыл бұрын
Trench warfare was consequence of failour of Shliffen plan.
@rommelcandiani6358
4 жыл бұрын
Uk too
@HeyImLucious
4 жыл бұрын
Not really. Entrenched combat lines along the front were only established once the initial German push got bogged down. And the Russian Army was only combat-ready near the front, not to mention they were still technologically and strategically behind (e.g. the Russians transmitted their battle plans using *uncoded* messages, so the Germans knew almost everything), which is why the German Eastern front saw so many successful counterattacks & achieved astonishing results like having an entire Russian army surrender after a failed assault into German territory. The Schlieffen Plan failed because of various reasons, such as: -- it was scaled back from its original inception due to caution, preventing the use of important railway systems, lowering the German force density, and slowing the overall operation down -- Belgium resistance tied down the advancing force for crucial days, which could've allowed the Germans to complete their encircling attack (doubly so because the French actually didn't know about the northern force until *after* they launched an attack of their own on the east. The French army could've been shattered if the northern force was able to strike from behind like they originally planned). -- Great Britain joining the allied cause. The British Expeditionary Force that landed in the middle of the German advance gave the defenders much needed backup, without which they may not have been able to halt the final German push (Britain technically wasn't at war with Germany while these initial events were taking place, they only joined after Berlin ignored London's demand that they withdraw from Belgium).
@lordanonimmo7699
3 жыл бұрын
@@HeyImLucious Do not forget austria hungary have a way below expected performance during the war.This led to german high comand overreacting.
@arthemis1039
8 жыл бұрын
I think WWII could have occur by the creation of a fascist France, with an "Adolphe Albert" like what happened to Germany in our world.
@random_estonian5356
8 жыл бұрын
Or Abradolf Lincler. No wait.. Thats for fascist USA..
@arthemis1039
8 жыл бұрын
Lol, nice name, but I don't see any way for US to be fascist at this time ^^
@random_estonian5356
8 жыл бұрын
It was a joke and the name was a refrence.
@arthemis1039
8 жыл бұрын
I know I know ^^
@mateogomez5773
8 жыл бұрын
Adolphe albert... AlterHis ?
@ItsMcLovinXd
8 жыл бұрын
A Game Th- oh wait.
@benrose8015
8 жыл бұрын
Same
@GrimNobody
8 жыл бұрын
But that's just a theory. AN ALTERNATE HISTORY THEORY.
@juanpartida3550
8 жыл бұрын
Thanks for watching!
@Christian-gr3gu
8 жыл бұрын
i am glad i watch him hey i think it would be funny if Alternate History Hub watch game theroy too.
@lukef1131
8 жыл бұрын
I loved that part!
@andersonklein3587
6 жыл бұрын
Well, it would have helped a ton if Germany had: 1-Not invested heavily in its navy. (angered British, was utterly useless and a resource drain) 2-Not rushed so many troops out of the Western front to fight the Russians as it panicked and generals resigned. 3-Mobilized early, rather than later. 4-Not underestimated the Belgium resistance. 5-Offered Italy land, doesn't matter if in Africa, France or wherever necessary to get it into the war. 6-Launched unrestricted submarine warfare from day one. ...
@sopmodo8122
5 жыл бұрын
They underestimate the French army in 1914, they were near of Paris then they advanced south to encircle the french army, but there were a french force in paris that threatened the germans forcing them to retreat. I think that it's called "The Battle of Marne"
@estradadavilafernandojavie8684
Жыл бұрын
@@sopmodo8122 the only reason why germany did not try to take paris was because the first german army that protected the flank of the second moved away from paris to maintain contact with it and continue with the encirclement
@brandtlucasbrandt
9 жыл бұрын
Reichtangle will rise. Haaalo Polan.
@uhrr13
9 жыл бұрын
+LukeDaDuke Was?
@EPR2514
9 жыл бұрын
+LukeDaDuke Reichtangle stronk
@goodsous
9 жыл бұрын
+LukeDaDuke No matter how you change the timeline, Reichtangle will always be there looking for Anschluss.
@dixieslav1274
6 жыл бұрын
Guten Tag, ist Anchluss Zeit, Polan?
@jahenders
8 жыл бұрын
Interesting video, but I think you overstate the Schlieffen Plan's problems. IOTL the Germans very nearly reached France, so not a lot would have to change to get them there. A few options: - Slightly weaker Belgian resistance - No French "taxi brigade' - Slower English decision to get involved - No German modifications to shift forces East before the war And, though the plan was conceived without the idea of UK involvement, the UK getting involved didn't (by itself) doom the Germans. Had the Germans gotten to Paris before (or despite) early UK involvement, the French might have bowed out. In that scenario, the Brits aren't likely to try to "go it alone." So peace might break out early.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
But the plan relies on immediately securing peace in the West. Problem is with Britain in the Entente that wouldn't happen for years, even if they couldn't properly counter-invade (ik he said Britain stays out of it but that still makes zero sense, we were in the Entente and we wanted that war). Unless I'm missing something the plan would still probably fail without Russia falling to the revolution, but there's no way the Germans could know that'd happen before the war began.
@jahenders
8 жыл бұрын
sm901ftw: I (obviously) disagree. The UK wasn't really dedicated to directly participating until immediately before war started and they only had a few forces in France (though they were significant). If France was quickly pushed out of the war, the UK might still stay at war, but I can't see them launching a D-Day style invasion into France to get forces there -- they'd likely limit involvement to naval and colonial actions. Additionally, the Germans beat the Russians pretty soundly multiple times before the Russian Revolution (it's a key factor leading to the revolution). If the French surrendered early, the Russians (already reeling from German victories in the East) would seek peace quickly, especially since their main treaty was with France. If Russia does get peace early that might even avoid/delay/change the revolution.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
jahenders I've since been told the Entente wasn't a defensive alliance between all three nations like I thought, so I agree with your point to some extent at least now. If Germany invaded france I can't see the BE letting it off scot free. That said if they were quick enough to knock out France it might be enough to stop a declaration of war. I know Germany beat Russia a lot in WW1, but when the plan was proposed there was no guarantee that Russia would be beaten even if it was successful. While Russia would likely surrender quickly if both France and it had been defeated, if France fell but Russia made gains they could still continue. It's no longer a war on two fronts though, so I guess that would be good enough even if Russia did keep fighting.
@Stormkat25
7 жыл бұрын
jahenders aa
@jarl8815
6 жыл бұрын
Totally agree jahenders
@roundman2825
7 жыл бұрын
So basically ww1 was america's puberty
@ottovonbismarckboi9112
5 жыл бұрын
Roundman u are a god now
@elevenseven2354
4 жыл бұрын
I would like but it’s at 69. But your right
@bigboijuice6523
4 жыл бұрын
More like it’s first girlfriend
@davidsuda6110
4 жыл бұрын
That's assuming our maturity is based on our involvement on the world stage some would argue us doing nothing is less costly and better for the world.
@prallel
4 жыл бұрын
orcfish Na that’s probably there pre teens
@charmatic_yt2195
4 жыл бұрын
The assassination of Franz Ferdinand directly led to the creation of Hentai.
@Groobis
4 жыл бұрын
well, not *directly*
@luckykai7473
4 жыл бұрын
Kind off actually
@looinrims
4 жыл бұрын
Little Nero singing PADORU PADORU Franz dies, world war 1 begins, world war 1 ends, world war 2 begins with the axis powers and imperial Japanese expansion, imperial Japanese attack America, America glasses japan, Japan rebuilds, hentai Something like that
@Ludwig_Perpenhente
4 жыл бұрын
@Little Nero singing PADORU PADORU because WW1 Lead to WW2 which lead to nuking of Japan Yes, it goes that far back
@FishkoVaysi
9 жыл бұрын
What if Pablo Escobar became president of Colombia !
@FishkoVaysi
9 жыл бұрын
Please Cody, this would've impacted the drug war hugely and it'd be cool to see your thoughts of it!
@WhiteLightning117
9 жыл бұрын
Please, Cody. You're my only hope.
@NomPrenom1
9 жыл бұрын
+Fishko Vaysi It was imposibble, how Pablo Escobar become a president?
@IkeThemage
8 жыл бұрын
that game theory reference tho
@ethanolsen170
8 жыл бұрын
That made me laugh so hard...
@IkeThemage
8 жыл бұрын
same
@hoseadavit3422
8 жыл бұрын
Do You know a perfect alternate history game. yes you name it Paradox Crusader kings, Europa Universalis, and my personal favorite Victoria
@hydra1259
7 жыл бұрын
Isaac Roe XD
@deadpan904
4 жыл бұрын
... and OverSimplified reference.
@howiefang7825
9 жыл бұрын
What if carthage won the punic wars?
@howiefang7825
9 жыл бұрын
+Howie Fang Idea for alternate history
@Tytoalba777
9 жыл бұрын
It'd not just be a change of borders and languages, it'd be an entire cultural shift. Today, we imagine Greece as the birthplace of Western Civilization. If Carthage won, we'd imagine Phoenicia (where the Carthaginians originally came, according to legend) as the birthplace of Western Civilization. The Culture of the Carthaginians were also much different then the Romans. The Carthaginians had a heritage of exploration, colonizing and trade (much more then Rome did). Had Carthage won, the Americas could have been discovered (permanently) a lot sooner, maybe as early as 1 AD! (just a random number) In contrast, Rome was focused much more on engineering, city building, and military.
@mirixusfecher4604
9 жыл бұрын
+Howie Fang Maybe the roman empire would never conquer galia britain and the hispanic territorys so that the stats of western and central europe would never develop. Moreover the languages and cultures in this regions could be dominate by the carthagians. And if the winner of the punic war didn´t expand like the romans the asian nomadic people and the parthain would become an bigger part in european history.
@snakey934Snakeybakey
9 жыл бұрын
+Howie Fang Hey! that was my question!
@Regal99
9 жыл бұрын
+Beni Habibi Me too. I really would like to see them cover that. :)
@ryandugan7000
8 жыл бұрын
i love how cute the people look
@witty2898
5 жыл бұрын
Gay
@mikewarnke404
5 жыл бұрын
Ryan Dugan look into oversimplified history
@ahmedabbas5652
5 жыл бұрын
@@witty2898 I bet u play fOrtNiTE
@mathieujuteau952
7 жыл бұрын
Hoi 4 kaiserreich
@jorgejavierlaborde6623
9 жыл бұрын
What if the Byzantine survived and win against the Turks
@ardapoda
9 жыл бұрын
+JorgeJavier Laborde you need to specify when, are you talking about 1400s or 1000s?
@SpatsirkSpart2.0
9 жыл бұрын
Arda Poda I guess he meant the Ottomans
@greenish8100
9 жыл бұрын
+JorgeJavier Laborde even if they won against them, they were doomed to fall, as the 4th crusade weakened them greatly and they never recovered
@SpatsirkSpart2.0
9 жыл бұрын
Fatihturk0071 But the Byzantines where orthodox Christians. "Because Muhammed said it would of been conquered" that's not a reason.
@SpatsirkSpart2.0
9 жыл бұрын
Fatihturk0071 But the Byzantines where the roman empire before it split in two parts. Jesus was a pacifist and didn't think about conquering. Africa was conquered because they were weak compered to the European powers. And I can't understand what you really wrote
@gustavojohannessautter9484
9 жыл бұрын
Just watched The Great War's video.
@jbthinker1423
9 жыл бұрын
lol
@MarcelloSevero
9 жыл бұрын
+Neutral JB No lol. That is not what lol means. You do not say "lol" when there is absolutely nothing funny about the comment. Got it?
@MrACGaming
9 жыл бұрын
+Lord Marcellus lol
@borderlandsgamer9001
9 жыл бұрын
+Lord Marcellus lmao
@borderlandsgamer9001
9 жыл бұрын
+Gustavo Sautter lol
@spacedoutorca4550
6 жыл бұрын
*We’d all be speaking German and eating peffrpothast all the time*
@prallel
4 жыл бұрын
Spaceorca dude uncool
@ad3l
4 жыл бұрын
@@prallel 😡
@jnb_110
4 жыл бұрын
GB Prallel You’re uncool, stfu
@henryboyer8342
8 жыл бұрын
Am I the only one that noticed Reichtangle?
@andreass.5831
8 жыл бұрын
+The General Harith 8:23
@Tommerslappers
8 жыл бұрын
+Henry Boyer Ich did, Now is Anschluss Zeit
@TheGeneralHarith
8 жыл бұрын
Orh ja!!
@anamericangrizzlybear8315
8 жыл бұрын
I luv polandball :D
@adriekjode1754
8 жыл бұрын
Guten tag
@MsSomeone98
9 жыл бұрын
1) Austria-Hungary Annexes Serbia and parts of South Western Russia 2) Ottomans take French North African territory and expand in the Caucasus 3) Germany takes the rest of the French colonies and all of modern day Poland, maybe even the Baltics.
@Todesbananez
9 жыл бұрын
+Siddiq Ismail Well, no. Germans had already more than enough problems with the poles living in there empire before the war. They would have installed puppet goverments in Poland and Ober Ost. Maybe even in the Ukraine and the rest of Belarus. Austria-Hungary and Ottmans would sooner or later collapse, possibly with Austria joining Germany.
@Horesmi
9 жыл бұрын
+Todesbananez Well, they installed a puppet government in Ukraine. This is one of the reasons why Ukraine wasn't given the recognition in the peace treaty, and Poland got large chunks of western Ukraine.
@gahamhumphrey4812
9 жыл бұрын
+Todesbananez i could see the Austro-Hungarians joining Germany in this scenario, I'm not so sure about the ottomans however
@ju44_0
9 жыл бұрын
+Siddiq Ismail Ottomans were doomed. Even if Germany's empire lived, the Ottomans would've fell apart long before the war ended.
@MsSomeone98
9 жыл бұрын
Todesbananez So they go the Hapsburg way and install Princes all throughout the newly "freed" countries? I'm not so sure about Austra-Hungary, but the Ottomans collapse is highly exaggerated. Most of their troubles in the 1800s came form Balkan nationalists, and Arab revolts were virtually nonexistent (aside from the different religious groups going at each other's throats every once in a while) until the British came, and even then the Arab revolt under Lawrence had at a small fraction of the arab population. Remember the Ottoman Empire's situation: the were sitting on the world's largest oil reserves as oil just started to become a thing. They were also rapidly trying to modernize but had funding problems (hence why they relied on the Germans). If the Ottomans survive WW1 without losing any territory, they'll most likely see an oil boom and get rich enough to fully modernize.
@malighos
7 жыл бұрын
"It could lead to an age of german dominance in Europe". So you mean europe nowadays?
@firedskull5015
4 жыл бұрын
Germans just living upto their dream.
@relgames6080
4 жыл бұрын
Germany isn't dominant over Europe
@malighos
4 жыл бұрын
@@relgames6080 and you really believe that? lol
@relgames6080
4 жыл бұрын
@@malighos well i like to be informed,c an you explain why they are?
@thomaskhan2933
3 жыл бұрын
@@relgames6080 (To preface this, I am American and our education on other countries and their state of affairs is as bad as you think, this is from my limited knowledge of the world outside my screwed up country) So from what I understand, Britain was the premier nation of Europe, however when they left the EU Germany had the next most influence, however Germany's leaders seem to be somewhat hesitant to assume that position of leadership due to, well, history. Hope this helps! Sorry for anything I got wrong
@PatnAntMC
9 жыл бұрын
I
@circlonianmapper
9 жыл бұрын
Same
@theorionshouter5015
9 жыл бұрын
+Top 10s woah top 10s!
@IgnarHusky
9 жыл бұрын
+Top 10s Why can't you stay in your own damn channel!?
@alexgrimes1553
9 жыл бұрын
What if France never helped the US for their independence?
@BiscuitGirl9154
8 жыл бұрын
4:01 I expected the "NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION" meme
@cdcopley3404
8 жыл бұрын
If the Schlieffen Plan had worked there never would have been a "Soup Nazi." No more soup for you! Step aside!
@dukes1993724
8 жыл бұрын
Very true and good point
@dfwai7589
8 жыл бұрын
+CD Copley ha
@chickenpox5434
8 жыл бұрын
Just watched that episode
@alternatehistorypt
9 жыл бұрын
nice video as allways, I'll wait for part II :)
@AlternateHistoryHub
9 жыл бұрын
+alternatehistorypt Thanks!
@americafuckyea2722
9 жыл бұрын
I love ur vids
@americafuckyea2722
9 жыл бұрын
+AlternateHistoryHub I love ur vids
@morsetsk
8 жыл бұрын
nope disagree he was only one man if he not there a other will take his place in history
@morsetsk
8 жыл бұрын
there more then one group of guys they try to kill him (but only one movie about that) and goering :D No not him he was in the army not in the reichstag but there are a lot of simular persons like adi @ the same time ..he let them eliminate, so if he not there this group have take the same way ...and the plan to the end was to push back the soviets @ all cost no one wont to go to sibira into a gulag and die there ps: staufenberg was not a hero he was one of the inner circle, a guy that not makes his uniform dirty if he wont him death then he takes his luga and one shoot from 3m in hitlers head ..he only wont more power in the time after the war but he dident wont to pay the price a real royal that staufenberg (freiherr, Baron)
@SchokoAprikose
4 жыл бұрын
8:30 Luxembourg is definitely small but not a kingdom.
@lukedubnicka7128
8 жыл бұрын
You should do a video that could be titled "What if NATO never intervened during the Yugoslav Wars?" I think that would be a fascinating video to watchh
@burekmesni4969
8 жыл бұрын
Srbs would still lose, they are stupidest nation of all time
@luiscallirgos5127
8 жыл бұрын
Perhaps so, but one with the most qualified and experience military. We are seeing a WW1 vid, try to read how Serbs crush invasions of 10 times their manpower. Of course til´ Germany and Bulgary joined the Austrians.
@gungriffen
8 жыл бұрын
The Great War is probably the best Historical KZitem channel. It covers the war Week By Week in chronological order on the 100th year anniversary of that week. Every important figure, the battles, politics, equipment, tactics, strategy, and weapons. The structure and detail of the shown is a marvel to behold alone.
@konstantinosmerikakis6206
8 жыл бұрын
then i have to check it out ... now more than ever cos battlefield 1 is comming .
@gungriffen
8 жыл бұрын
+Konstantinos Merikakis Greatest historical show on KZitem.
@Aurelian369_
2 жыл бұрын
>week by week My god, I thought I was nerdy
@gungriffen
2 жыл бұрын
@@Aurelian369_ lol They're onto WWII Now
@ColonelPeppers
5 жыл бұрын
I'm watching this in 2019, and Cody's voice is a lot deeper now.
@supervegito2277
3 жыл бұрын
Better mic i suppose, compare his 2014 videos and it sounds even higher, but with lower quallity.
@RedXlV
8 жыл бұрын
What if the Ottoman Empire had never joined the Central Powers? That's always been one of my favorite alternate WW1 scenarios.
@deltoroperdedor3166
6 жыл бұрын
RedXlV it would have been a longer civil war
@electricpants8194
6 жыл бұрын
They still would have fallen
@seaanimal101
2 жыл бұрын
@@electricpants8194 no I think they would have not fallen Watch What if Aultist
@kwaobenti
9 жыл бұрын
The video makes it seem like the Schlieffen Plan failed only because of British involvement and so the only scenario allowing it to succeed is that the British stay out of the war! But is this necessarily true? Certainly the British played a big part in the failure of the Schlieffen Plan. But it is arguably the case that the biggest reason for its failure was not mentioned in this video. The fact that the plan was not implemented properly. The Schlieffen Plan was substantially modified by German Chief of Staff Helmuth von Moltke, who then allowed it to be further modified as events unfolded. These modifications fatally undermined its effectiveness. What is always remembered about the Schlieffen Plan is that it requires that the heavily defended Franco-German border is circumvented by substantial German forces going around it into northern France through Belgium across the Franco-Belgian border. But there is another element to the plan that is often forgotten. That smaller German forces located at the Franco-German border should be limited in size, and should play a relatively passive role in the first instance. This would lure the French forces at the border into crossing the border into the area they so desired to re-acquire, i.e Alsace-Lorraine, and beginning an invasion of south-western Germany. The German forces there were supposed to fall back, drawing the French forces further and further away from their heavily fortified areas in France opposite the German border. Only when the French forces had reached an appreciable distance away from their safe areas, was the German army there supposed to strike hard and fully engage that force. With a substantial part of the French army thus engaged against German forces in south-western Germany, there would be virtually no French forces within easy reach of the main German force pushing through Belgium into northern France. And with very limited French forces available to oppose the main German force pushing through northern France, the chances of a 'Miracle on the Marne' type outcome that saved France would be very low indeed. A German victory would be at hand! But as we know this did not happen in reality as the Schlieffen Plan was not correctly applied. Instead of a light German force opposite the Franco-German border there was a heavy one. And though the German forces there did draw back slightly and begin to lure the French forces away from their fortified areas on the French side of the border and into Germany, this only occurred to a very limited extent. Why? Because the local German commanders, Prince Rupprecht and General Krafft, objected to a passive strategy and wanted to grab some glory by strongly taking-on the invading French force early. And as French forces were now on German territory, these commanders applied strong pressure to German Chief of Staff von Moltke to give them orders allowing them to strongly engage the enemy. After 3 days von Moltke gave way and these orders were given, with the result that French forces, though suffering heavy casualties, were thrown back into France to their fortified areas. This German mistake was then compounded when Rupprecht & Krafft applied further pressure and von Moltke again gave way and allowed them to attack the heavily defended French fortifications, resulting in over 300,000 German casualties. But the more important consequence was that this strong French force, sitting behind its fortifications, was in France and available to be transported rapidly by train toward Paris & northern France should the need arise. And when it became clear that the bulk of the German army was actually attacking northern France from Belgium, large numbers of these French troops started being sent west and northwards from the Franco-German border, by train. And it is precisely these troops that were to form the French '6th Army' that was used to undertake the 'Miracle on the Marne' battle that saved France and stopped the progress of the German army in northern France. If the Schlieffen Plan had been applied correctly, could it have worked despite British involvement? Of course we can't know for sure, but it seems entirely possible! Remember, the British expeditionary force, though it delayed the German advance, was eventually overcome and pushed into full retreat. The decisive factor at the battle of the Marne was the substantial number of French troops joining the battle after having been transported by train from eastern France. These troops would not have been available had the Schlieffen plan been applied properly! So the chances of the Schlieffen Plan succeeding were not as small as this video makes out. What killed it were its modifications and von Moltke's failure to ensure it was properly applied!
@toddcrane4318
9 жыл бұрын
The plan also asked for avoiding strong French forces but Von Moltke weakened the German wings and allowed the French and British to counterattack
@Kardia_of_Rhodes
9 жыл бұрын
+Ben Johnson Also Russia Mobilized much quicker than Germany expected so they had to divide their forces.
@tytube3001
9 жыл бұрын
+Ben Johnson Britain would have made any excuse to join the war. Germany was a big threat to it's empire, it is easier to gang up and beat Germany than to fight them alone.
@kwaobenti
9 жыл бұрын
+MAXZONE47 True, the Russians did begin to mobilize quicker than expected, but that did not mean von Moltke was right in weakening the attack through Belgium by sending extra troops east toward Russia. They didn't get there in time to participate in the German victory at Tannenberg anyway! The success of the whole Schlieffen plan depended on the 'knock out blow' to France by the German forces invading through Belgium, succeeding. This was an essential requirement. Anything that reduced the likelihood of that was likely to be a big mistake. But the Germans were too worried about the idea of any of their cherished homeland, such as East Prussia, being overrun by the enemy, even temporarily. Von Moltke, a weak and flawed character panicked and easily succumbed to pressure. He didn't really give the strategy a chance! Not long after the German failure at the Marne, he had a nervous breakdown and was replaced!
@kwaobenti
9 жыл бұрын
+tytube3001 Yes, Belgium was something of an excuse for Britain to join the war. Belgium was a small neutral country and those in the British govt. who favoured war were able to use Belgium to convince the doubters in the Parliament and in the country that Britain had to enter the war to counter German aggression. But the real reason Britain went to war was simply in order to stop the Germans winning, especially against France. The British did not want to see a German dominated Europe, or the Channel ports under German control.
@zyanego3170
3 жыл бұрын
If the Schliefen Plan succeded we would live in a Steampunk world
@leonel2184
3 жыл бұрын
Lol
@texaschizophrenic
9 жыл бұрын
Fuck yeah, I love you Cody and Indi!
@TheGreatWar
9 жыл бұрын
+texaschizophrenic We really like you too.
@gahamhumphrey4812
9 жыл бұрын
Dude, did you just get friend zoned by a youtube channel?
@AlternateHistoryHub
9 жыл бұрын
+texaschizophrenic I have a girlfriend but I'm flattered
@BJReolon
9 жыл бұрын
+AlternateHistoryHub omg you have a girlfriend??? thats amazing
@brandoncochran7703
9 жыл бұрын
+AlternateHistoryHub With a voice like yours,I'm not surprised.
@sssfsfdfsdsdffsfsdf4
9 жыл бұрын
I wonder what should happen if in the 30s the U.S. Acted on war plan red to invade the uk. If the uk lost, the empire would be American and may have fell apart. If they failed then maby the uk would have joined the axis powers and split Europe and everywhere else between the uk and Germany and how the development of this Anglo/Germanic empire would have affected the world. Also the technology that the uk and Germany produce (the jet engine and rocket technology) would have ensured the survival of the empire and maby the successful invasion of the U.S. Since they had no technology even rivalling the jet/rocket.
@sssfsfdfsdsdffsfsdf4
9 жыл бұрын
+Dr.Blondie at Aryan labs thanks
@sssfsfdfsdsdffsfsdf4
9 жыл бұрын
+Advanced Prime his Video is more about the Schleifen plan working and is much less about war plan red
@somepolishmoment9118
6 жыл бұрын
I just imagine France in this scenario talking to Belgium just like I TRUSTED YOU
@pkindigohacker
9 жыл бұрын
lol my name is cody so that kinda scared me.
@carultch
9 жыл бұрын
+Cody Batterson What does Cody from Alternate History Hub look like?
@AlternateHistoryHub
9 жыл бұрын
+carultch A Roman god that's what
@jorgizoran4340
9 жыл бұрын
+AlternateHistoryHub could you make a part 2 to them what if the cold war never ended video?
@cra7ysoldier172
9 жыл бұрын
+AlternateHistoryHub Hey do you have a twitter?
@patrickcummins79
7 жыл бұрын
I had remember reading a book for my in depth German history class in college.. The book had said something to the effect that when the Schlieffen Plan was even at full strength, it still was way overly ambitious with what it set out to do, even at those max manpower levels.
@rebelgaming1.5.14
4 жыл бұрын
So Indy has Collaborated with Sabaton, Paradox, and Cody. What a legend
@Ray_D_Tutto
8 жыл бұрын
Just found out this existed. Instant sub.
@TristanBomber
8 жыл бұрын
Had the Schlieffen Plan been successful, the two major world powers would be Britain (not destabilized by the war) and Germany, and later, the Soviet Union. Due to harsh terms in the Treaty of Stuttgart (a parallel to the Treaty of Versailles) and a depression, France experiences the fascist wave that Germany had along with Italy and maybe Japan and so WWII is made a reality but with a French rather than German enemy; however, it is less racist and more akin to that of Napoleon's empire in spirit. Despite the rivalry between Britain, Germany, and the Soviets, they would ally to contain French imperialism and would be quickly crushed; it is at this point that the US is drawn into European affairs, likely on the Anglo-German side due to cultural ties. France is crushed and split into occupation zones between British (in the north), American (in the west), and German (in the east) zones, with the Soviet Union perhaps occupying some French colonies in the East. A three-way Cold War begins between democratic America and Britain, monarchal Germany, and the communist Soviets.
@maxmustermann-ie6ic
7 жыл бұрын
TristanBomb I would totally watch a movie about that
@armedwombat6816
5 жыл бұрын
All the Central Powers really had to do to win the war was not invading Belgium and play it defensively in the west. The Schlieffen plan already (and somewhat correctly) assumed that Russia would take a while to mobilize - but it took the wrong conclusion, in that it would be best to take out France first. Had Germany used the ressources the Schlieffen plan took for an initial assault on Russia, they would have wiped the floor with the czar's armies while France would have been wasting manpower uselessly attacking the fortified positions on the franco-german border. No british involvement means that Italy would have been easier to handle. It probably never would have switched sides if the Kaiser had promised them some french land and colonies (and in this case the promises wouldn't seem so far-fetched). And even if they did, Germany would have had the ressources to handle that situation much better. The Ottoman Empire would have likely also not joined the Central Powers, but they weren't really helping much anyway. Really, keeping the Brits out of the war was the one factor that could have won it for the Central Powers. Though Britain might have still intervened at some point to avoid the possibility of a german-dominated Europe. But without a legitimate reason and without the propaganda advantage that the invasion of Belgium gave them, they would have had a much harder time.
@rohiths9099
2 жыл бұрын
Exactly!
@CesarGarcia-nd5xz
2 жыл бұрын
Mm… that’s not entirely true, in WWI France was a titan, Germany had chances, but that high
@graustreifbrombeerkralle1078
8 жыл бұрын
"AMERIC... no, I'm just kidding, the UK"BEST xD
@Sk1ttleFrog
5 жыл бұрын
Perhaps the plan could have been more successful If the Germans reversed the plan. They maintain defensive positions in Alsace-Lorraine and the Rhine Land and start an offensive into Russia before Russia is ready for war. Also this would likely mean no Communist Revolution would occur in this timeline. After Russia is defeated in about 6 to 10 months the Germans could move all of their troops to the western front. Instead of going around French defenses, the Germans push right through them, delaying British involvement in the war. Assuming French high command orders all retreats to be stopped and trench warfare begins. The Germans would need to gain the allegiance of Italy, whom they already had pre-war ties to. They could do this by promising Italy southern France and Corsica. The Italians open a front in southern France and with forces spread thin, France falls Britain likely joins the war during the invasion of France, worrying that Germany will become too powerful.
@luvee659
4 жыл бұрын
I feel like the French would become too powerful during the plan though, it's true that Russia's military isn't ready for war but it's terrain definitely is, the Germans would have a hard and long time moving through Russia and while that's happening the French could very well up their own defence or even do a push inside Germany itself
@u121386
6 жыл бұрын
What if the schlieffen plan fail-- oh wait 😃
@rubenlangvik7100
8 жыл бұрын
The British king George V, the Russian Tsar Nicholas II, and the German Kaiser Wilhelm II were all very very closely related. I even think they were cousins (educated guess, not 100% sure). Just look up the extreme physical similarities between George V and Nicholas II on google.
@tiwaz4534
8 жыл бұрын
They were cousins, Wilhelm and Nicholas wrote back and forth, adressing eachother as "Willy" and "Niky"
@SideStrafed
8 жыл бұрын
they were actually first cousins. They had the same grandmother
@theoutlook2879
9 жыл бұрын
Ehhh I think blitzkrieg was the best tactic, they would have to be VERY fast if this worked I mean like INCREDIBLY FAST.Hey Can I make videos with you😕😕😕
@haiderbutt2454
9 жыл бұрын
vehicles were developed enough for the Blitzkrieg.
@jameschebahtah
9 жыл бұрын
In WW1 vehicles weren't so developed so blitzkrieg would have been much slower.
@jamesrigby8554
9 жыл бұрын
+Jalen Evans It only worked in World War II from the technology at the time
@theoutlook2879
9 жыл бұрын
+James Rigby Whell in this alternative timeline cars go as fast as Lamborghinis and planes are F-20's.
@theoutlook2879
9 жыл бұрын
+Ackbar Loves You Yes do you think this video would EVER WORK in ww1 hmmmm😐😐😐
@lionheart6176
3 жыл бұрын
indy has really grown hasn't he...collabing with cody to getting with Sabaton. its kinda beautiful
@kaiserreichempireofohio834
6 жыл бұрын
2:08 🎶I'VE BECOME SO NUMB, I CAN'T FEEL YOU THERE....🎶
@zachharris8978
9 жыл бұрын
A request for a future video: What if the Louisiana purchase never happened?
@destroyerofworlds6824
9 жыл бұрын
+Zach Harris US probably would have taken it anyway. A sort of French version of the Mexican-American War.
@Atilla_the_Fun
9 жыл бұрын
Or Maybe Lousiana gains Independence just like Haiti did.
@sion8
9 жыл бұрын
Since, France had just regained control of Louisiana a few years prior from the purchase from the Spaniards, I could see Spain regaining some of that territory specially the north, the southern parts would have been the most likely to have become independent (how does the Republic of New Orleans sound?). However, successful would these territories be? I mean France saw no use of Louisiana after they lost Haiti and they only became what they are because they became part of the U.S. as they need a "breadbasket".
@DarthLiam-gd1wc
4 жыл бұрын
i just realized, because Poland was gone for centuries, when it popped back up. it was like that one friend from high school that you haven't seen in years
@1jomojo
9 жыл бұрын
What if the Schlieffen Plan Succeeded? WORLD PEACE
@heyyou2078
6 жыл бұрын
1.What if the Great Depression never happened? 2.What if the civil war never happened? 3.What if the nazis never rose to power
@efeyldz2620
5 жыл бұрын
Just Trying 1. Hitler wouldn’t rise to power. 2. Racism and slavery would destroy US. And probably they woulda have an ideology as same as the nazis. But just the name of the ideology would be different. 3. Hitler would try to start a civil war,but that attempt wouldn’t be succesful. So he would probably killed by goverment.or the communist. And a socialist revolution would start in germany.
@sonnydog830
8 жыл бұрын
Thanks Mr. Sandwich. You're the reason that WWI was started
@JellothePallascat
4 жыл бұрын
This was the video that introduced me to Indy Neidell. It was love at first site.
@74wf
5 жыл бұрын
*UK HAS JOINED THE CHAT* WW1 Germany: You weren't Supposed to do that
@CD-vg4hl
7 жыл бұрын
i swear to god your little animation people are adorable.
@jsansamatic6933
2 жыл бұрын
Honestly it’s not completely impossible to imagine, if they had won the battle of the Marne they could’ve taken Paris
@saladbruh2625
7 жыл бұрын
That "ehm ehm sorry" got me so good I was laughing so hard.
@bobganskow
8 жыл бұрын
Germany was just pulled in. Russia mobilized troops and signed a treaty with Serbia before the war started. Germany got sucked into a deal with Austria-Hungary.
@hemshah4127
7 жыл бұрын
If Schlieffen plan was successful our world 🌍 would be a much better place to live in.
@b_lowjob2550
6 жыл бұрын
Hem Shah agreed
@Benjamin-Franklin
6 жыл бұрын
Hem Shah he said this was one theory,Read KaiseRRiech then we will talk
@yulio3000
6 жыл бұрын
Unreasonable statement. Pure speculation.
@fulcrum2951
6 жыл бұрын
So europe is basically the entire world to you people....
@Aztlan632
6 жыл бұрын
The Conservative View the monarchist germans werent Nazis and Germany was a great place to live in before the war
@elpapas397
8 жыл бұрын
'MURICA!!! no I'm just kiddin
@howardbaxter2514
7 жыл бұрын
Just imagine how different things would have been if the Lusitania wasn’t hit by German U-boats and the Zimmerman Telegram never was sent.
@nicholask7566
6 жыл бұрын
2uyhgf5 Yeah, totally, we are all completely and exactly like that. (In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm).
@heavypupper1219
6 жыл бұрын
f58b97d6b2b13 When do you see us saying this?
@superbeltman6197
4 жыл бұрын
Suggestion:What if Germany didn't invade Belgium
@baron_von_brunk
7 жыл бұрын
What if Hogan's Heroes wasn't fiction?
@majorcharleswinchester8268
6 жыл бұрын
...it wasn't?
@nefariousgremlin7554
6 жыл бұрын
Oh hai
@stephaniefrancis4501
5 жыл бұрын
Shultz you dumkaff!!
@TwentythreePER
7 жыл бұрын
Very interesting video and well thought out. Well done. Please do more videos about WWI as I am currently studying this war and time in history.
@fear3682
5 жыл бұрын
The schlieffen plan has to have to things change the get beat Belgium faster and win in the Marne even with Britain they could take Paris and possibly most of the north west coast so their flanks are Secure the French mostly likely surrender to save Paris that has surrendered or under segie
@vivacolombiagames
9 жыл бұрын
The game theory reference had me laughing so hard lol
@kunicross
8 жыл бұрын
Don't forget - we did use almost the same plan one more time in WW2 and it worked perfectly so maybe the plan was not as unrealistic as most think - if Belgium had let the troops pass not only England would have stayed out of the war but also the missing resistance in belgium would have speed up the armies so that's really a good point to make the plant hypothetical work. I think the main result of a working plan would have been a swift victory over france - with mild surrender conditions as well - probably a new change in Government in France as in 1870 (back to monarchy?). If the war would have been short and swift surrender conditions would also be milder on france since not much harm was done (Also Germany declared war not France) As a direct consequence Italy would not join the war on allied side (maybe as another central power - they had been allied after all) and it's totally thinkable that russia would also have sued for peace fast (Kaiser Wilhelm and Tzar Niklaus being cousins after all and russia had not been in any alliance obligations to declare war over Serbia - no matter how its quite sure that russia would have been beaten - but maybe in a way that does not contain a communist revolution (Germany did much support here to make it happen). So the war would have been over around 1915-1916 - most monarchies would stay in place - the biggest issue might be that the powder keg europe which exploded in our timeline would still be in existing - a short and decisive war would potentially leave many armies greatly intact as well as deepen resentments all around. It is also thinkable that with its gained power Germany and Britain would ally and create a new axis of power - the main reason Britain favoured France was that they deemed Germany not dangerous enough to need to be allied with them... The real question is if all the states would have managed to stay internally stable after the war - I see special breakup-potential in Austria Hungary - conquering serbia will give them a deeper foothold in the balkans but that region had been unstable all the way before and the empire itself had been kind of unstable already - depends mostly how the succession of Kaiser Franz would go. I think if the states of europe could manage to suppress and pacify their internal struggles monarchy and colonialism would have prevailed might even till today, The US would have stayed an pacifistic and isolated state and still have Cuba and the Philippines. The world would probably be more peaceful but birth would determine much more about our fate then it does today and we would look very differently on human rights and stuff alike.
@lonewandererschmidt9169
8 жыл бұрын
KuniCross The Schlieffenplan was very different from Mansteins "Sichelschnitt". Only the defence by the french, belgians and british was nearly the same. Thats why Mansteins idea was succesful and the leadership of Moltke junior failed (mostly because of the known changes Moltke made. Schlieffen was already dead when parts of his plan were used. btw. A myth says the last words of Schlieffen were: Make the right wing strong). ww1: two attacking wings. The strongest through Belgium to attack Paris from the north for a quick encirclement of the french capital to demoralise the french. ww2: The attacks on the netherlands and belgium should provoke the same defence strategie like in ww1. And it did. When the german panzers crossed through the ardennes (which was thought to be impossible by the french) most of the troops of the french were moving towards Belgium. When the germans turned there armys north towards the channel most of the french and all the british forces were trapped. So totally different plans.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
But there's no way Britain would've stayed out of the war, even if Belgium let German forces through. Britain was still in the Entente, and so was obligated to join the war when France is invaded. Sure, it makes defending France much harder, especially if Britain was too slow to send help, but it's not like we'd immediately surrender if France was lost. So german forces would still be tied up to an extent in the West while it fought the russians.
@kunicross
8 жыл бұрын
sm901ftw actually the Entente was only a agreement between France and Britain about their colonial empires and influence spheres a true Alliance only existed between Russia and France and they mostly allied so Germany would face a two front war in case it would attack any of them - which then was the reason for the whole plan to knock out France fast and early to have all the power available against Russia. Britain was not as eager for war compared to the other nations around but the invasion of neutral Belgium was the tipping point for them. Also if you look at Greece it would have been possible for Belgium to allow passage of the German forces but it would have been a humiliation of national pride - but also countless lives in Belgium would have been saved as well as damages in infrastructure etc. so wiser leaders would might have swallowed their pride but that's not how it went. Also it's really questionable if our present would be better, could be that communist revolution would have happened as a worldwide phenomenon instead of being limited to Russia.
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
KuniCross Ah, guess I was mistaken. I thought the Entente was a defensive alliance between all three powers. Even still France being invaded might have turned heads, though perhaps not enough for war. Sure Belgium could've swallowed its pride, but with that agreement with the British I suppose it didn't think it had to. It's leaders probably figured even if they couldn't beat Germany alone, the British and French helping them out would be enough to turn the tide. Remember no one really thought the war would be as large or bloody as it was, so it probably seemed like a reasonable response at the time. Plus letting the Germans likely wouldn't be taken well by Britain OR France, and the fighting could still take place on Belgium soil if the plan didn't succeed immediately. Don't remember saying the world would be better/worse off. I don't think anyone can accurately predict how the world would be if WW1 turned out differently, seeing as it effectively broke several of the worlds dominant powers.
@RojoFern
5 жыл бұрын
You're telling me that I knew about Indy Neidell before I knew about Indy Neidell?
@woodsman9427
8 жыл бұрын
But it work the second time
@Jx-kj9fs
7 жыл бұрын
militia squad 20 years is a lot of time for things to change, also Germany had smart leaders with updated tactics like Manstein and Guderian. The French were ready to fight a war in 1890 in 1914 and to fight a 1914 war in 1939
@woodsman9427
7 жыл бұрын
crapvile yeah that true but if the British sent more troops or started the war earlier during the Czech faith was happen then maybe the war would of be over quicker but nooo
@ori6990
4 жыл бұрын
@@woodsman9427 yeah appeasement allowed Germany to become way too strong to defeat. also the fact that during their invasion of poland, the allies did LITERALLY NOTHING.
@ori6990
4 жыл бұрын
plus the encirclement at Dunkirk wiped out most of the French army, so the rest of France was easy
@sm901ftw
8 жыл бұрын
My only problem with this is isn't the consequences at all, but the plan itself. Why would the UK not involve itself even if Belgium gave Germany permission. Britain and France were both in the Entente, so shouldn't the UK have been obligated to join the war as soon as Germany entered France? Even if we eventually decided we couldn't defend/retake France or the Western Front, it would take a long time before peace was negotiated. And in that time Germany would still have to leave troops on the western front while still fighting with Russia. Maybe they could hold out for the revolution and win the war, but Germany had no reason to believe that would actually happen until after the Schliefen Plan was carried out.
@gabrielheraud41
7 жыл бұрын
sm901ftw the 'Entente cordiale' wasn't an alliance, it was a colonial pact
@sm901ftw
7 жыл бұрын
Ah, fair enough. Its strange since how it was taught to me was that the Entente and Alliance were basically built to counter eachother. Kinda like the Warsaw Pact and Nato during the Cold War. Wonder why no one ever told me otherwise.
@gabrielheraud41
7 жыл бұрын
sm901ftw the 'Entente cordiale' was like the germano-sovietic non agression pact in 1939, only like if UK was saying "hey France, let's stop beeing ennemies, let's make peace, and if someone attacks you maybe I'll help you"
@dorkfish1275
6 жыл бұрын
Britain saw the alliance as defensive. and so was rather neutral. but Germany attacked another neutral nation, Belgium. leading Britain to do the logical thing and attack.
@ikoartiaga5971
6 жыл бұрын
why I do feel like I saw this plan in a anime called youjo senki.. I can't remember what episode is it but the pattern of the plan was exactly the same..
@brandtlucasbrandt
9 жыл бұрын
love colabs
@TheGreatWar
9 жыл бұрын
+LukeDaDuke We do to!
@doesntmakeanysence2u
9 жыл бұрын
+The Great War too*
@louiethepitt
9 жыл бұрын
interesting video
@hellsing8843
9 жыл бұрын
+louiethepitt yes
@louiethepitt
9 жыл бұрын
exactly just imagine....the alternative timeline is way better than our crappy timeline.... 1-Bolchevic revolt was sponsored by Germany to take out Russia...in this timeline there wouldn't have been a necessity to help the communist and Russia would have been defeated before the red revolution....so that translate to a world with no real Communist power....Russia maybe would still have a Czar....No communist China, no Cuba missile crisis, no Soviet Union, No Ukraine conflict, Chechen conflict, no invasion of Tibet by china, no Vietnam war....any type of conflict that came out of Communist spread would have been tone down or never happened at all. 2-ottoman Empire fading by its own without being split by westerners...this would have stopped in its track the Zionist movement...so that translate to no Israel state, no massacre of Palestinians by Israel, no Palestinian conflict, more organic distribution of the land according to religion Islamic alignment and ethnicity...there still will be conflict between the two Islamic groups but this would be more tone down, No ISIS, no 9-11, no war on terror, no Afghanistan war with Soviet Union nor USA...it would be a more civilize and organic middle east with no Jew invaders in Palestine....No Iran conflict with Westerners...no mass immigration to Europe from middle east....lower gas prices. 3-A victorious Germany would also translate into a more prosperous central Empire...with Socialist tendencies but no chance for extremist groups like the Nazi to win any kind of election and that goes also for the communist...The government would have a lot of influence in Europe, economic, military....you could say that it would have rival Britain and the USA...Jews never would have been persecuted, no need for Israel state in Palestine....Gold will be the worlds currency...No UN...no economic crash in Germany, no central banks in most of the world, no need to change to petroleum based gas, most countries the majority would still be on alcohol based gas. No UN development bank braking country after country with debt so this translates to a great reduction in poverty and 3rd world countries. 4-If Britain in this scenario wouldn't enter the war...they would have remain as the worlds #1 superpower, they wouldn't have given the trade to USA in the pacific so the war with Japan would still had happen but it would have been a trade war and with Britain not USA...the world superpowers would be more equally distributed....Britain would have ended the worlds richest nation and even more influential that the victorious Germany. 5-USA not entering the war....no baby boom so a more stable population with no mas illegal immigrants, no crash in the 20s equals no FED, no removal from gold standard because there wouldn't be any war effort, no economy based in the war military industrial complex, no Dollar as worlds reserved currency, so there would,'t have been any mas printouts of dollars like we have today, the debt would be maybe a couple of billion dollars at the most, we wouldn't be on the brink of an economic collapse, China wouldn't own the debt, no welfare state in almost all the world, a free market would be the Norm, no need for passports to travel...they where put into place between WW1 and WW2 to control spy etc...in this scenario people would be free to trade visit where ever they want....most important USA wouldn't have this Imperialistic idea of policing the world and intervening in other countries ...so that is a no CIA cover missions to overthrown governments like Chile, Persia, Guatemala Libya etc etc etc...Mexico and the rest of Latin America wouldn't have been fucked by undercover CIA missions to take over the resources nor they wouldn't be broke by the UN development bank so this economies would be stable maybe even a lot as 1st world countries with no Guerrillas no CIA etc....who knows what would happen with Drugs that is the real question. The world went to shit the moment Britain and later USA entered the war and in this scenario the world is so much greater for humanity...its a shame.
@skatetubefromFB
9 жыл бұрын
+louiethepitt want to live there now.
@patricknapier5806
8 жыл бұрын
Guten Tag! Prepare for Anschluss!!!
@imathewofcanada3930
7 жыл бұрын
Do what if kaiserschlat was successful
@DaDunge
8 жыл бұрын
It would have worked fine if britain had not joined the war. And considering they were allies before the war it's easy to see why they thought that britain would at best stay out (the kaiser was even a grandson of Victoria I of Britain).
@rubenlangvik7100
8 жыл бұрын
+Fredrik Dunge The British king George V, the Russian Tsar Nicholas II, and the German Kaiser Wilhelm II were all very very closely related. I even think they were cousins (educated guess, not 100% sure). Just look up the extreme physical similarities between George V and Nicholas II on google.
@DaDunge
8 жыл бұрын
Ruben Langvik Yeah counsins is correct, well atleast I know that Wilhelm was cousins with both Nicholas (Whom he called Nick) and George, that they were counsins too I did not know but fair enough. It's still odd that the British empire would care more about Belgium than it's blood ties to Germany and Russia.
@scratchy996
8 жыл бұрын
The kings and emperors were just puppets, the politicians and generals had all the power and they wanted war.
@DaDunge
8 жыл бұрын
If they wanted war why did everyone struggle so much to prevent it?
@rubenlangvik7100
8 жыл бұрын
I disagree that the emperors and kings were just mere puppets. The monarchs were very much so in power in their respective countries. Have a look at The Russian Empire in which Nicholas II disbanded the commander in chief of the russian army Nicholas Nikolaevich and took direct control himself. Another example is Austria-Hungary where, rather ironically, the austrian crown prince Franz Ferdinand were the very paragon against going to war towards Serbia - And as long as he lived, for about 50 years if im not mistaken, they never invaded Serbia. But The Austro-Hungarian Commander i chief had over 20 or so times asked the emperor Franz Josef to go to war against Serbia, but the crown prince had always stopped him
@captainstryker2326
5 жыл бұрын
Wasn't Britain in the triple Entente? What was the alliance for?
@danb7202
7 жыл бұрын
I love the great wars channel
@stuka80
8 жыл бұрын
If you're gonna create a scenario where Germany wins, why not just include everything that actually happened, and just say that Germany beat France and England on the western front through military force instead of taking wild detours like saying England never joins the war...
@idkwhattonamethis-k8q
8 жыл бұрын
because the numbers would be against them with Britain in the war and this would create the stalemate which actually happened
@stuka80
8 жыл бұрын
Al Coholic The Germans were not vastly outnumbered on the Western Front any more than in the 2nd World War.. The presence of the British Army in itself at the outset of war didn't cause stalemate. Besides, it still doesn't matter, he could still have said something to the effect of "The German right wing crushed the Allied Forces as the Schlieffen plan intended and rolled over the rest of the armies in the center, leaving an open road to Paris, with the British evacuating what's left of their forces from the Continent."
@idkwhattonamethis-k8q
8 жыл бұрын
True
@brycehawkins6342
8 жыл бұрын
Don't say England cause. England isn't the only country in Britain and at least mention British commonwealth also like Australia etc. Btw I'm Scottish
@sagnikmondal4058
6 жыл бұрын
Because that's more of a wild detour. With UK in the war, Germany would've been heavily outnumbered. And with a worthless ally like Austria-Hungary, they would basically would have to stand alone against the UK, France and later, USA( if UK joins, USA would inevitably join, since there would be no peace and the USA would get more time and reason to mobilize out of its isolationist state, a lot like WW2.
@Makem12
Жыл бұрын
I like to think that in some alternate world they're making alternate history videos on "What if the Schlieffen plan failed?"
@Hasassin47
8 жыл бұрын
What If The Ottoman Empire survived?
@thetigerking2971
8 жыл бұрын
Yes I want that
@aneural
6 жыл бұрын
They didnt fall they just changed government
@stronkblyat6435
5 жыл бұрын
They actually survived WWI, but they collapsed in 1922
@theanimationlads7598
7 жыл бұрын
I came from indie
@AxelBlaze991
7 жыл бұрын
Who are you?!?!?!?!?!?!
@Treblaine
Ай бұрын
The Schlieffen Plan could never have worked. It was the worst possible plan, it had all these fatal flaws: 1. Refusing to hit Russia immediately squanders your best advantage against Russia which is catching them pre-mobilization 2. It's a physically longer distance to go through Belgium to get to Paris than to just go directly through France from the German border. 3. Belgian resistance was guaranteed to slow you down when you absolutely needed speed against France's faster mobilization. 4. Invading Belgium guaranteed UK joining the war, you can maybe dismiss the BEF but not the Royal Navy. 5. France was not even guaranteed to surrender even if Paris was taken, it wasn't like the end of Napoleon III's floundering empire. There were many advantages to not even trying to invade France and just hold the line between Luxemburg and Switzerland: 1. Germany could in fact resist the ENTIRE French army along that border with a fraction of its army. 2. Republican secular France was not going to be that motivated to throw an entire generation into the meatgrinder because a piece of paper said they had an alliance with the Tsar, but they would to avenge an all out invasion. 3. By baiting France to attack Germany this would trigger Germany's defensive pact with Italy, obliging Italy to defend Germany and attack France. It was Britain that persuaded Italy to switch sides. 4. With the UK out of the war, overseas trade would be a lot easier, the French Navy couldn't deal with the Italian and German naval threat simultaneously. 5. Russia would find it easier to accept concessions like losing territory that hardly had any Russian speakers.
@Wendeta-hq2cp
14 күн бұрын
For the flaws I would say that Numbers 4 and 5 are not right. The reason Paris was so heavily defended was Because Paris was and still is the logistic heartland of France. Also there have been information digging after the fact proving that Britain found the German Empire to be a danger and so the Belgium thing was just a pretext. France would have called upon the Entente Cordiale with Britain the same way Germany would have called upon Italy. For the advantages number 2 is incorrect. France wanted to get back Alsace and become the premiere continental power, something it had prior to German Unification. So they would have thrown as many generations as they had to ensure they won and Germany was no longer a power. By extension advantage number 4 is also incorrect. Also if by number 5 you mean the Tsar giving away Poland, the Baltics and Finland, then yeah that was feasible, but the German Empire wanted more than that. which would not be acceptable. Flaw Number 1 is the best point though. If Germany acted upon the Schlieffen plan in reverse then RU would have been knocked out early, with Serbia and Romania capitulating without support and France would have fallen soon after, resulting in Germany finding itself in a similar position that of Napoleon: they would be the primary continental power, with many allies and puppets, but no feasible way to defeat Britain, implementing a Continental system by default unlike Napoleon's planned one.
Пікірлер: 3,4 М.