Alternate History Ideas and Discussion

Buba

A total creep
Funnily enough, there were episodes (i.e. hundreds or thousands of years) during Pleistocene and early Holocene when this is exactly how Western Siberia drained, i.e. into the Caspian (sometimes into Black Sea).

If implemented, probably the same environmental disaster as in river reversals in the USA and Canada.
As to future implementation - lolnope - see above, plus lack of money and Central Asia no longer being Russian.

It might had led to fulfilment of one of my fantasies, i.e. making the Uzboy River run again and - with the reversals - thus create a barge route into Western Siberia.
sniffle ... sniffle ...
 
Last edited:

ATP

Well-known member
You still have to get there and if your consuming a lot of resources developing building and maintaining a heavy bomber force, even a relatively small one, something else has to give. Plus don't forget that to have say 200 a/c in an attack you would need to build a lot more because of losses in developing and earlier service, a/c being unavailable on the day etc. Not to mention you have to reach the target which means a very, very long flight, even from say occupied Donbas region.

I have read before suggestions that safety measures at Baku were appalling and a lot of the local earth was soaked with leaking crude. [Think it was from a US drilling expert]. This would fit in with the rather reckless behaviour and poor training so frequent in the USSR. However that would also suggest that some accidents would have happened which could have been disastrous for the region. Never heard either way so would like some clear evidence either way.

That it is why it could work only against soviets and even then only in Baku.But - enough to slow soviets to the point that they would be at best at Dniepr river when war would end.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
'AHC: Have an Austria-Hungary led by a surviving Franz Ferdinand voluntarily go to war without anything involving the Hungarians and without anyone declaring war on him or his country's ally Germany beforehand'
 

Buba

A total creep
That'd be pretty much OTL WWI reason - Serbian state terrorists murder Sophie and/or his children - reason good enough.
Better still - FJ gets murdered in Sarajevo ...
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
That'd be pretty much OTL WWI reason - Serbian state terrorists murder Sophie and/or his children - reason good enough.
Better still - FJ gets murdered in Sarajevo ...

I don't think that FF would go to war with Serbia over FJ's assassination. But he might over Sophia and/or his children. Might because he loathed and feared war. But his emotions would be very powerful in such a TL, so who really knows what he'd do, right?

'AHC: Have Eastern Europe maintain huge Jewish communities after the Holocaust up to the present-day'

In real life, Eastern Europe has gradually been losing its surviving Jews ever since the end of the Holocaust:


getfile.ashx


This decline, of course, has continued over the last two decades and is still continuing.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Archduke Franz Ferdinand survives. He's still shot, but not fatally, and he urges peace, making a speech to all the empires during which he accurately predicts that open warfare between them would prove pyrrhic, leading to mass death and destruction, bankruptcy forcing decolonization and desperation-induced spread of revolutionary sentiment among their plebeian populations and rolls a bunch of natural twenties on his charisma checks.

The alternative Great Game ends up as essentially the cold war ahead of schedule, with spies from the various colonial empires infiltrating the colonies of their rivals to stir up and assist revolutionaries/freedom fighters/terrorists in proxy wars to drain resources and manpower. This probably ends in an alternative World War when either a pan-national revolutionary movement/communistic dieselpunk GLA is accidentally formed or a colonial empire resorts to fascistic tactics of 'kill them all and move in your own colonists' for preventing revolution among colonial subjects and their rivals take it as an opportunity to justify invading to steal the colony for themselves protect the locals.

GLA = Grand Liberation Army?

I would agree with this and its probably doubtful, even if no great conflict occurred in the 1910's that some major conflict would occur centred on Europe given the tensions in place, the development of 'social-darwinism' ideas and that inevitably changes in power balances are likely to trigger something. Also that there hadn't been a great destructive war in the European heartland for a century while a number of wars in the period since had been relatively bloodless and decisive for the victor I fear that too many would think too lightly of a great war, as occurred with many in 1914.

FWIW, some people even before World War I understood the dangers of a Great War. Franz Ferdinand, for instance. And Pyotr Durnovo:


Are we prepared for so stubborn a war as the future war of the European nations will undoubtedly become? This question we must answer, without evasion, in the negative. That much has been done for our defense since the Japanese war, I am the last person to deny, but even so, it is quite inadequate considering the unprecedented scale on which a future war will inevitably be fought. The fault lies, in a considerable measure, in our young legislative institutions, which have taken a dilettante interest in our defenses, but are far from grasping the seriousness of the political situation arising from the new orientation which, with the sympathy of the public, has been followed in recent years by our Ministry of Foreign Affairs. . . .

Another circumstance unfavorable to our defense is its far too great dependence, generally speaking, upon foreign industry, a fact which, in connection with the above noted interruption of more or less convenient communications with abroad, will create a series of obstacles difficult to overcome. The quantity of our heavy artillery, the importance of which was demonstrated in the Japanese War, is far too inadequate, and there are few machine guns. The organization of our fortress defenses has scarcely been started, and even the fortress of Reval, which is to defend the road to the capital, is not yet finished.

The network of strategic railways is inadequate. The railways possess a rolling stock sufficient, perhaps, for normal traffic, but not commensurate with the colossal demands which will be made upon them in the event of a European war. Lastly, it should not be forgotten that the impending war will be fought among the most civilized and technically most advanced nations. Every previous war has invariably been followed by something new in the realm of military technique, but the technical backwardness of our industries does not create favorable conditions for our adoption of the new inventions.

All these factors are hardly given proper thought by our diplomats, whose behavior toward Germany is, in some respects, even aggressive, and may unduly hasten the moment of armed conflict, a moment which, of course, is really inevitable in view of our British orientation.

The question is whether this orientation is correct, and whether even a favorable issue of the war promises us such advantages as would compensate us for all the hardships and sacrifices which must attend a war unparalleled in its probable strain.
 

stevep

Well-known member
GLA = Grand Liberation Army?



FWIW, some people even before World War I understood the dangers of a Great War. Franz Ferdinand, for instance. And Pyotr Durnovo:


A few did. There was a Polish businessman - name beginning with B but can't remember in full who predicted a long extremely destructive war of attrition - but most expected a short and relatively quick war 'over by Christmas' which would be minimally disruptive. [Mind you the vast majority of them all expected to be on the winning side.] Others expected a war would be over relatively quickly because European economic interests were so intermingled that no one could maintain a war for long.

Unfortunately too many, especially in the leaders both political and military were of the quick war mentality and unwilling to accept a peace negotiation. :(
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Unfortunately too many, especially in the leaders both political and military were of the quick war mentality and unwilling to accept a peace negotiation. :(

After war started, it might have been felt that peace negotiations would make the existing sacrifices worthless and that thus once war has broken out, one has to be ready to fight right up to the bitter end.
 
Last edited:

Buba

A total creep
There were military men - on both sides - expecting years of war. But these were not that many, true.
a Polish businessman - name beginning with B
After war started, it might have been felt that peace negotiations would make the existing sacrifices worthless and that thus once war has broken out, one has to be fight right up to the bitter end.
And this is why universal (male) suffrage combined with conscription suXXor. Look at the Cabinet Wars - once the ruling elites deemed it appropriate, a war was over. No sunk cost fallacy, no need to appease the peasants, no wars to total destruction.
 
Last edited:

WolfBear

Well-known member
Our man Bloch operated in a mileu using at least four languages :)

Didn't he predict that Russian troops would be more capable of fighting a longer war due to them being more sturdy due to them being farmers as opposed to urban workers like a lot more of the German troops were?
 

Buba

A total creep
Didn't he predict that Russian troops would be more capable of fighting a longer war due to them being more sturdy due to them being farmers as opposed to urban workers like a lot more of the German troops were?
This I don't know.
What I do know is that such predictions were not uncommon, for all sorts of reasons (medical and political) and acted upon i.e. Germany, a country with about 50% urbanisation, recruited some 2/3rds of conscripts from Land und Kleinstadt (rural and small town) districts. The UK had problems with finding enough healthy recruits among its rickety urban dwellers etc. etc.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
This I don't know.
What I do know is that such predictions were not uncommon, for all sorts of reasons (medical and political) and acted upon i.e. Germany, a country with about 50% urbanisation, recruited some 2/3rds of conscripts from Land und Kleinstadt (rural and small town) districts. The UK had problems with finding enough healthy recruits among its rickety urban dwellers etc. etc.

 

Buba

A total creep
So, to continue the previous thought, "Russian peasant eatink organic grown food and stronk. Beat rickety German slumscum easy" might had featured in Bloch's writing.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
So, to continue the previous thought, "Russian peasant eatink organic grown food and stronk. Beat rickety German slumscum easy" might had featured in Bloch's writing.

Did you take a look at my link above here?

Also, what if there was no Enigma breaking in World War II?
 

Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
What would it have taken for France to hold back Germany's invasion of it, and what would WWII have looked had France not fallen?
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
What would it have taken for France to hold back Germany's invasion of it, and what would WWII have looked had France not fallen?

I don't know if this would have been enough, but having France keep its strategic reserve at Rheims as per the original plan instead of sending it to the Low Countries would have significantly helped since then it could have stopped the Germans at Sedan and thus prevented the success of Operation Sickle-Cut.

Anyway, in such a scenario, it all depends on whether or not Hitler and the Nazis subsequently get overthrown by the Schwarze Kapelle. Though even the SK might not necessarily agree to the kind of peace deal that the Anglo-French are demanding, at least not without having Germany incur additional casualties beforehand.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top