If not fot this morning 100 yearsa go, what might have happened

100 years ago this morning World War I began for all intents and purposes. Since some of us like alternative history.....

Say the guys who pulled off the hit had one more cup of coffee and missed the Archduke going by. What would have happened?

Would we be having issues in Iraq today?
Would Israel exist?
Would Germany and not the USA been the modern space and nuclear superpower?
Would the USA Civil Rights movement have happened sooner or later than it did (WWII probably affected it more than we think)

Discuss.

Oh, and a pox on whoever mentions Germany's heavy water experiments, the V-2 rockets to carry them, and Joan Collins.

The First World War was a disaster for the Ottoman Empire. It would perhaps be better to try and guess what would have happened with no WWI on the OE, then to take on the task of an entire world without WWI. Casualty rate was even higher than Russia.

Ottoman Empire
21.3 Population (millions)
325,000 to 771,844 Military deaths (from all causes)
Civilian deaths (military action and crimes against humanity)1,500,000
Civilian deaths (malnutrition, disease) 1,000,000
Total deaths 2,825,000 to 3,271,844
Deaths as % of population 13.26% to 15.36%
Military wounded 400,000 to 763,753

Last two sultans
Mehmed V Reshad He was girded with the Sword of Osman on 27 April 1909, died 3 July 1918 at age of 73
Mehmed VI He was girded with the Sword of Osman on 4 June 1918, Ottoman sultanate was abolished in 1922.

==================================
I was taught that WWI was inevitable. The exact event that triggered it was relatively inconsequential. If it hadn't been one event it would have been another.

I often wonder if WWIII will be described as inevitable.

Quote: Pacomartin

==================================
I was taught that WWI was inevitable. The exact event that triggered it was relatively inconsequential. If it hadn't been one event it would have been another.

I often wonder if WWIII will be described as inevitable.

I have heard the same about WWI. As if you threw a cigarette out the window in AZ this time of year and started a brush fire. Might have been someone else or might have been lightning, but the fuel was there.

The fall of the Ottomans is the hidden failure of the end of the war. A bunch of fake countries in their place.

WWIII has already been fought, a/k/a the "Cold War."

WWIV is just starting now. Islamic World vs. the West. Like the other 3 the tactics and battles are different, but it is on.

Tinderbox? Battles often start at one patrol meeting another. Or simply one group of soldiers looking for shoes or shelter or food.

Inevitable. Folly. Who knows, but usually the ascribed cause is not relevant. Remember the Maine? It was probably not even sabotage?

But instead of what happened to the Sick Man of Europe/Asia, what happened to England.
Exposure of a contemptible lack in sanitation and food and wounded care.
Exposure of an incompetent officer corps.
Greater reliance on mechanisation and automatic weaponry.

Quote: Fleastiff

Tinderbox? Battles often start at one patrol meeting another. Or simply one group of soldiers looking for shoes or shelter or food.

That is the spark in the tinderbox.

Armenian extermination, Turkish famines due to inept administration and corruption, etc. can hardly be attributed to a war, they simply happened to take place during a time of war.

Quote: AZDuffman

That is the spark in the tinderbox.

Completely. What happens if Franz Ferdinand becomes the ruler of A-H? Serbian nationalism and a desire for a more united Serb/Slavic dispora might have been dissuaded, with a more federal Austria-Hungary. So, perhaps it might not have sparked off right then and there. As it was, A-H really wanted to neuter Serbia's influence, so after the death of the Archduke, the road to some sort of war was on...

So Princip misses, and the Cassus Belli that Germany and A-H doesn't arise in July 1914, and the domino's don't fall over then.

Would we have seen a later crisis? Probably. The Black hand of Serbia would have agitated in Bosnia, and while the cuase might not have been a dead Duke, some sort of atrocity would have been caused. Would this delay have made a difference? Possibly... Serbia, Germany (partly), Russia, France and Britain didn't want a state of general war, though the Germans were split on the issue. They really wanted a neutral Britain, and tried hard to engineer it, pinning the problem on the Russians as much as they could. Problem was, their plans were to take out France, which required invading Belgium.... and thus the British Navy is involved.

So, I'd suggest WW1 happens anyways, maybe in late 1914 or early 1915. Russia and France are more prepared for it. Russia doesn't make too much difference though, as they were crumbling internally, and WW1 brings about the Russian revolution pretty much on schedule. France and the UK might be able to stage a better defence in the West initially. Perhaps they somehow decide to not waste troops on the Dardanelles, but I see no reasons why they don't drag Turkey in still.

The bigger what if, depends on if Italy views Russia as the aggressor. If the spark comes from the other direction (a direct Serbian aggression in Bosnia, because lets recall the Black Hand was semi-state sponsored, and might have done something stupid). Italy involved on the Central Powers side from day 1 changes the Med dynamic, and the situation for France. If Italy joins the Triple Alliance, Turkey probably doesn't get involved (as the British Navy has too many other issues in the Med), but the south of France is open, and there's suddenly support in the Balkans too.

I see Russia still folding (Tannhauser or something similar happens), and the Western Front stabilizes sooner. When the US gets involved is key. If the Germans push their U Boat strategy, it still happens, but the isolation of the central powers with Italy on board doesn't happen, and this changes things in Turkey, Kurdistan and all that area. I suspect it's isolated from the war, the Balkans becomes under the control of the Central Powers, and Greece is threatened. Italy may even want to try and take Tunis as a colony, though that depends on how France is doing.

Overall, that doesn't look good for the Entente, and I suspect a peace breaks out earlier, with the British unable to isolate with their navy, and having much less of a heart for the war. The question is what does Germany want for peace? The rest of the Alsace Lorraine, limited British navy, and eastern territories. Poland doesn't re-emerge. Germany doesn't pay war restitutions, but France and the UK possibly does.

This may lead to Communism taking hold in France much more readily, and a Nationalism like the Italian Fascists. The UK might see a Mussolini character, as Italy's intervention on the Central side would not have lead to his rise down there (he was pro-Entente, and eventually pro-nationalism rather than international socialism after the war). I can see a history were the rise of the 'third way' happens, while A-H and Germany (and to some extent Italy) become the old imperial powers that France and the UK were after WW1. I don't see a French 'Hitler' causing the same agitation for lebensraum in the East, but a more limited desire to reclaim the Alsace Lorraine, and other areas lost during WW1 and before. France probably looks south to Africa.

The UK is less likely to have a quiet revolution like what happen in the last days of the Weimar Republic than France. Isolation from Europe is more likely, and possibly isolation from her old colonies, who fought a war in Britains name, and will be faster to gain independence (one way or another) from a country that lost the war and seems unable to provide protection. Canada and Australia march to full independence faster. Depending on the US's exact involvement, this may lead her to continue it's passive interest in Europe, rather than getting involved. This leads to a slower rise of the USA as being the power it was (and maybe it doesn't become a super power). The US Navy doesn't grow as fast, as it has no need.

World War 2 doesn't happen the same way... Germany though may get invaded by the Russians much earlier when the Red Russian army doesn't have Poland in the way to try and bring Communism to the rest of Europe.... and if Communism takes hold in France as well, we see a fight across Germany from two sides... of the old hierarchy crumbles and we have the socialist states across Northern Europe.

Just some ideas, depending on Italy joining the war from another side.

Hmmm...

The question I have is what it would take to win England? In World War I, did Germany have the technology and wherewithall to invade England and be successful given the Eastern front and the remainder of the occupation forces required to keep everything else?

I agree with CessPit that WW1 probably happens anway.

Quote: boymimbo

Hmmm...

The question I have is what it would take to win England? In World War I, did Germany have the technology and wherewithall to invade England and be successful given the Eastern front and the remainder of the occupation forces required to keep everything else?

I agree with CessPit that WW1 probably happens anway.

England, or the entirety of the British Isles? :) England is just one part of the country :)

I don't think Germany can defeat the British Home fleet. If it does (say Jutland works in a way no-one expected) and the Home Fleet is no longer a fleet-in-being, or a fleet-at-sea, perhaps. I suspect they don't bother... just make the British and her commonwealth allies sue for peace.

Germany could not have done anything but annoy England during WWone. Commerce raiders, Uboats, and Zepplins would annoy but be insufficient to allow an invasion much less one that could not be repulsed. England needed money, food, troops and munitions in France.

Now in WWtwo there is no doubt that Germany could indeed have invaded and held Britain. Britain had evacuated troops but no equipment from Dunkirk. The Home Guard was armed at best with antique fowling pieces, there were no beach defenses and no anti-tank guns. England had silenced all church bells, destroyed road signs, painted out town names on store fronts and all persons seeking directions were sent only to police stations. A fortuitous code change helped forestall one invasion and a raving Adolf Hitler sent German planes to Blitz the cities, just as the RAF was about to crumble. As bad as the Blitz was, it was the only thing that gave the RAF fields a breather.