He never kicked puppy !Is there no sin this man will not commit? Is there no depth towards which he will not sink?
Whenever you think you've reached the end of Wilson's many faults and vices, you discover some further depravity.
China rules world now.'No One-Child Policy In China'.
While I don't know enough of the causes of the Crimean War to be certain, its absence leading to a more aggressive Russia could lead to an earlier Russo-Japanese War, which at the right timing could serve a similar purpose without souring Russia's diplomatic prospects with other European nations.In the absence of the Crimean War, was there any other potential incidents where Tsarist Russia would suffer a similar traumatic defeat that would prod them into making serious reforms?
Yes, it was a dick measuring contest between Nappy and Nicky, with British paranoia in the mix. Absolutely needless and out of the blue.Question: Could the Crimean War Have Been Prevented
A Turkish war of some sort is almost a given and Britain would back the Porte.In the absence of the Crimean War, was there any other potential incidents where Tsarist Russia would suffer a similar traumatic defeat that would prod them into making serious reforms?
Written assurances from Britain and maybe France?But that might not happen as Sweden wouldn't be strong enough.
In the short term - no. Austria is fresh out of having unleashed Polish peasants on the local szlachta - who treated them like a bad US slave owner - hence no threat.Though that could possibly backfire on the Austrians as well, because of Galicia-Lodomeria.
Just a sketch (short on time, don't want to forget).
During the meeting at the Doncaster bridge with the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Duke of Norfolk finds himself in a bad spot. The king (Henry VIII) has ordered him to negotiate with the rebels and get them to disperse, but the rebels won't lay down their arms unless given concessions beyond his authorization; in short, the only way to carry out his orders is to break them, and with a king like Henry that's never a good idea. Rather than make these promises, he writes to Henry to ask for clarification (PoD), and is told to succeed or die. Norfolk decides his only hope of survival is to turn against Henry and hope for the best.
Norfolk maneuvers the Earl of Shrewsbury into attacking the pilgrims by himself and getting himself killed; the Pilgrims have now killed a royal official and several thousand soldiers, and can't turn back. Norfolk and his men defect and join the Pilgrims on the march southward.
Henry is infuriated and orders an army raised--realistically, he could hold out in London due to the rebels' lack of siege engines, but the treasonous audacity of the rebels (and Norfolk in particular) is too much to stand. He raises a force (~15,000) men and marches north; the two armies meet near St Albans sometime in February 1537. Henry has better men and the Pilgrims have been worn down through travel and poor logistics, and so orders a full-on frontal assault (with himself leading, of course) to put down the peasants and kill that bastard Norfolk. The battle begins with the loyalists hitting the rebels like a sledgehammer, driving the footmen before them, but the charge soon bogs down as the rebels swarm over the horsemen; in the chaos, Henry's bodyguards are overrun and he is dragged from his horse and killed*. The cry goes up that the King is Dead, the morale of the loyalists breaks and they flee the field.
What next? My expectation is that the rebels will declare Mary the rightful ruler (Edward VI being yet unborn) and march on London. Norfolk uses the opportunity to purge the Seymours/any other rivals and wields immense influence for the forseeable future. And what of religion? The Pilgrims were arch-Catholics, so the monasteries are surely restored, but what next?
Thoughts?
*Technically, the Pilgrims only want Henry's advisors to be removed from office and he himself to remain the king, but at this point there's a war on and it's reasonable to think that he could be killed, even if only by mistaken identity in the chaos.
I Wonder what will the fallout would be from the Polish Uprising for Austria. Considering that it could have also spread into areas of Poland under Prussian control, the Prussians would have an even bigger incentive to help Russia put it down in any case.Written assurances from Britain and maybe France?
In the short term - no. Austria is fresh out of having unleashed Polish peasants on the local szlachta - who treated them like a bad US slave owner - hence no threat.
But in the longer term - yes, and is exactly the reason why poking at the Polish Question is a bad idea for any of the paritioning powers.
BTW - I now remember whence the theory of "Prussia helped plot January Uprising" comes from - there was a thaw between Sankt Peterburg and Paris, and Berlin wanted to scupper it.
Look at OTL Prussian reaction in 1863.Polish Uprising [...] Considering that it could have also spread into areas of Poland under Prussian control, the Prussians would have an even bigger incentive to help Russia put it down in any case.
That's exactly why Bismark cosied up to Russia.I think that this could also cement relations between Russia and Prussia, and thanks to Russian neutrality, Prussia was able to defeat Austria and France in their wars.
Just a sketch (short on time, don't want to forget).
During the meeting at the Doncaster bridge with the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Duke of Norfolk finds himself in a bad spot. The king (Henry VIII) has ordered him to negotiate with the rebels and get them to disperse, but the rebels won't lay down their arms unless given concessions beyond his authorization; in short, the only way to carry out his orders is to break them, and with a king like Henry that's never a good idea. Rather than make these promises, he writes to Henry to ask for clarification (PoD), and is told to succeed or die. Norfolk decides his only hope of survival is to turn against Henry and hope for the best.
Norfolk maneuvers the Earl of Shrewsbury into attacking the pilgrims by himself and getting himself killed; the Pilgrims have now killed a royal official and several thousand soldiers, and can't turn back. Norfolk and his men defect and join the Pilgrims on the march southward.
Henry is infuriated and orders an army raised--realistically, he could hold out in London due to the rebels' lack of siege engines, but the treasonous audacity of the rebels (and Norfolk in particular) is too much to stand. He raises a force (~15,000) men and marches north; the two armies meet near St Albans sometime in February 1537. Henry has better men and the Pilgrims have been worn down through travel and poor logistics, and so orders a full-on frontal assault (with himself leading, of course) to put down the peasants and kill that bastard Norfolk. The battle begins with the loyalists hitting the rebels like a sledgehammer, driving the footmen before them, but the charge soon bogs down as the rebels swarm over the horsemen; in the chaos, Henry's bodyguards are overrun and he is dragged from his horse and killed*. The cry goes up that the King is Dead, the morale of the loyalists breaks and they flee the field.
What next? My expectation is that the rebels will declare Mary the rightful ruler (Edward VI being yet unborn) and march on London. Norfolk uses the opportunity to purge the Seymours/any other rivals and wields immense influence for the forseeable future. And what of religion? The Pilgrims were arch-Catholics, so the monasteries are surely restored, but what next?
Thoughts?
*Technically, the Pilgrims only want Henry's advisors to be removed from office and he himself to remain the king, but at this point there's a war on and it's reasonable to think that he could be killed, even if only by mistaken identity in the chaos.
Ouch that's a nasty idea. It could lead to either a prolonged Catholic domination of the nation with a bitter clampdown on reformist or a very bloodly civil war, which could also prompt foreign intervention. Not good for England either way.
Yes, it was a dick measuring contest between Nappy and Nicky, with British paranoia in the mix. Absolutely needless and out of the blue.
A Turkish war of some sort is almost a given and Britain would back the Porte.
Another favourite is the Polish Question - again Nappy (plus FJ) meddling. @ATP will tell you that the OTL January Uprising was orchestrated by Bismark, so Prussia also could have had a finger in the pie.
Just a sketch (short on time, don't want to forget).
During the meeting at the Doncaster bridge with the Pilgrimage of Grace, the Duke of Norfolk finds himself in a bad spot. The king (Henry VIII) has ordered him to negotiate with the rebels and get them to disperse, but the rebels won't lay down their arms unless given concessions beyond his authorization; in short, the only way to carry out his orders is to break them, and with a king like Henry that's never a good idea. Rather than make these promises, he writes to Henry to ask for clarification (PoD), and is told to succeed or die. Norfolk decides his only hope of survival is to turn against Henry and hope for the best.
Norfolk maneuvers the Earl of Shrewsbury into attacking the pilgrims by himself and getting himself killed; the Pilgrims have now killed a royal official and several thousand soldiers, and can't turn back. Norfolk and his men defect and join the Pilgrims on the march southward.
Henry is infuriated and orders an army raised--realistically, he could hold out in London due to the rebels' lack of siege engines, but the treasonous audacity of the rebels (and Norfolk in particular) is too much to stand. He raises a force (~15,000) men and marches north; the two armies meet near St Albans sometime in February 1537. Henry has better men and the Pilgrims have been worn down through travel and poor logistics, and so orders a full-on frontal assault (with himself leading, of course) to put down the peasants and kill that bastard Norfolk. The battle begins with the loyalists hitting the rebels like a sledgehammer, driving the footmen before them, but the charge soon bogs down as the rebels swarm over the horsemen; in the chaos, Henry's bodyguards are overrun and he is dragged from his horse and killed*. The cry goes up that the King is Dead, the morale of the loyalists breaks and they flee the field.
What next? My expectation is that the rebels will declare Mary the rightful ruler (Edward VI being yet unborn) and march on London. Norfolk uses the opportunity to purge the Seymours/any other rivals and wields immense influence for the forseeable future. And what of religion? The Pilgrims were arch-Catholics, so the monasteries are surely restored, but what next?
Thoughts?
*Technically, the Pilgrims only want Henry's advisors to be removed from office and he himself to remain the king, but at this point there's a war on and it's reasonable to think that he could be killed, even if only by mistaken identity in the chaos.
Ouch that's a nasty idea. It could lead to either a prolonged Catholic domination of the nation with a bitter clampdown on reformist or a very bloodly civil war, which could also prompt foreign intervention. Not good for England either way.