| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 moltke1 |
Building | ||
|
Posts: 549 (21-Jul-2008 15:08:07) |
Roller wrote:
So then Germany has to keep building....till that happens. Definitively. Absolutely no reasons not to do exactly that. |
||
|
Dave Bender |
Germany has to keep building....till that happens. | ||
|
Posts: 6790 (21-Jul-2008 17:16:39) |
To some extent. But remember the goal is to bankrupt Britain. Not to amass additional dreadnoughts per se. Germany has large advantages.
1. The German economy is larger then the British economy to start with. 2. The German economy is growing faster then that of Britain. 3. Britain will probably desire to match German naval strength 2 for 1. 4. Germany has some allies in strategic locations. So what should Germany do? 1. Bulk up the Ottoman navy with older model German ships. Especially in the Persian Gulf. This will force Britain to maintain a strong fleet in that region. 2. Bulk up the KuK Marine. This will force Britain to maintain a strong fleet at Malta. 3. Build some new German dreadnoughts while hinting that you are building even more. We want Britain to lay down 8 new dreadnoughts every year @ £6 million each. 4. Establish overseas naval bases in places like Duala and Dar es Salaam. Post-WWI Germany has zillions of used naval rifles from scrapped warships for the shore batteries. 5. LettersTime Germany should suck up to the U.S., emphasizing common goals towards China and Japan. We want the British to be diplomatically issolated. 6. Keeping France, Russia and Italy from aligning with Britain is easy. Just remind them who they share a border with. LettersTime Germany can play this game throughout the 1920s until the poverty stricken British peasants have had enough. Similiar to what happened to the Soviet Union during the 1980s. |
||
|
richard roper |
|||
|
Posts: 65 (21-Jul-2008 18:20:37) |
Jim, All,
The British economy emerged disasterously from the war - there's a thread asking for statistical info. on the Interwar section of this site - , but they lacked the political will and economic insight to make the changes. See the references there. It was the greatest Pyrrhic Victory in history. This is because rivals had developped their own industries during the war to take over British markets, US shipbuilding and shipping lines had sprung up rapidly during the war competing with the British, the loans had been invested in the US. by manufacturers putting in the most modern plant, too much British capital had gone abroad into foreign investments rather than modernising home industry, and these investments had been sold off during the war at knock-down rates. The loans were crippling and the world's financial centre had moved from London to New York. If the war ends sooner then all this is not as bad, on the other hand no Carthaginian Peace so no reparations so even the lower level of loans can't be repaid. But if the loans are defaulted the US. economy is in trouble withso much investment capital invested in a Triple Entente victory. It was predicted there would be a huge depression in the US. in 1920 if in OTL this happened. The problems WERE recognised in 1911, hence Haldane's missions to get Germany to build at a lower rate, which they decided to do anyway. This was because of the lack of tax income to finance a larger building programme for Britain. But it appears the problem of the larger German economy and higher growth rate and its significance were recognised by the Roundtable, of which the Liberal Imperialists were members, long befor e the war, hence the plans to get Germany and hostility to her. This was a secret society of leading "policymakers" from the early 1890's to restore the hegemony and world position of Britain and the world domination of the British Empire. If rational decisions were taken Britain at this point should be getting the Duke of Clarence and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Edward VII's brother, to come to Geneva with WII's peace offer which they quickly accept. |
||
|
New Hampshire Battleship Lover |
Who's Number Three... | ||
|
Posts: 1857 (21-Jul-2008 19:19:51) |
Right now, in operational dreadnoughts (including battlecruisers) The USN is number one, with ten dreadnoughts able to put to sea. Granted, some are
obsolescent, but to a number counting elected oficial or newspaperman, the numbers can be used to good effect. Somewhere in the USA, soneone's going to
count hulls, realize that the USN is number one, and try to convince Congress to keep it that way...
Could the USN get 16" guns to sea earlier than it actually did? |
||
|
Dave Bender |
If rational decisions were taken Britain at this point | ||
|
Posts: 6791 (21-Jul-2008 20:08:09) |
The last chance for rational British decision making went out the window in July 1914.
|
||
|
jim 1 |
|||
|
Posts: 9193 (22-Jul-2008 02:42:56) Generally Obscure |
richard roper -
Your points on the mocements of capital and factors of production are excellent ones! The point about the US problems if Britain should default on loans may not be the same magnitude of a problem in LT if the war ends earlier than historical. Keep in mind that the very first such instrument was not finalized until sometime in September 1915 for $500 M. It happened with lansing as US S of S, not WJ Bryan, and after USW had done some preparatory work in US hearts and minds. Thus, I would expect some delay in that first loan, and also the ones that come after. It is possible that Great Britain will buy a bit more time by alternative sources for food and some other products available at higher cost from S American countries. GB also has lost somewhat fewer merchantmen than historical, though the Hanzik sweep off the US East Coast closed that gap some. The costs of Gallipoli should also be lower in LT. GB loses some or all of that gain by increased ship construction costs, and training costs for new recruits to replace dead and wounded aboard existing ships. I do not know if there were death benefits, etc. but - if so - there would have been that, also. If the BEF deployment slows from historical, that would help costs, though at the expense of the French. |
||
|
NewGolconda |
|||
|
Posts: 3526 (22-Jul-2008 02:49:17) Commonwealth Moderator |
"Kaiser Bill is an evil Hun. He must be stopped no matter what the cost."
Very good, excellent - you are coming a long way. More power to your arm. |
||
|
Roller007 |
|||
|
Posts: 1237 (22-Jul-2008 04:50:04) |
Jim, their is no statistically significant difference between the number of sinkings during the first USW and the number of u-boats. Based on that Britian
should have lost almost as many merchant ships as historical. Hanzik's sweep easily made this worse than historical sinking or capturing 200000+ tons of
shipping. Now the second USW is significant which has been explained to me as a result of more u-boats and many carrying 2 to 3 times the torpedo load of the
ones during the first USW period.
Roller007 |
||
|
Syphon1 |
|||
|
Posts: 544 (22-Jul-2008 11:03:36) |
jim 1 wrote: Jim, There are other problems with the US non entry into the war they don't get to seize German assets in the US.
Another problem is what if Kaiser Bill get some sort of repatriations from say France ie they hold Paris hostage which causes France to default on their loans from GB. It is a given that Russia will default. This will have a flow on effect directly to the US economy. It would not surprise me if in letterstime there is a recession after the war as many Entente economies collapse due to the external cost of the war.
We satisfy our endless needs
And justify our bloody deeds
In the name of destiny
And in the name of God
David
|
||
|
richard roper |
|||
|
Posts: 66 (22-Jul-2008 12:48:04) |
Oh yes. The US. did very well out of the war by seizing German property including a lot of chemical patents which proved highly valuable. These were sold to
US. chemical companies at knock-down rates.
|
||
|
Syphon1 |
Another question | ||
|
Posts: 552 (25-Jul-2008 13:23:58) |
How far do you people think Wilson will bend for the Entente while facing adverse public pressure.
As was mentioned in the lastest installment and the battlecruiser thread. If the papers turn against Wilson for him acting against them getting the news from Europe or if Ryan buys German ships and reflaggs them only to have the french seize them. Does Wilson have the stones to stand up to these influential groups in an up coming election year? I'd say no! and Hell no! Like any politician he'd see the way the wind was blowing and cut his losses.
We satisfy our endless needs
And justify our bloody deeds
In the name of destiny
And in the name of God
David
|
||
|
Dave Bender |
How far do you people think Wilson will bend | ||
|
Posts: 6829 (25-Jul-2008 17:11:29) |
Most accounts state that President Wilson was unwilling to compromise once he had staked out a position. So I would not expect President Wilson to do much
bending.
|
||
|
Syphon1 |
|||
|
Posts: 553 (26-Jul-2008 03:20:02) |
Dave Bender wrote: How in the hell did Wilson become a politician? Compromise is a necessity for a politician if they don't do what their backers and voters want then they don't get second terms.
We satisfy our endless needs
And justify our bloody deeds
In the name of destiny
And in the name of God
David
Last Edited By: Syphon1
26-Jul-2008 13:23:50.
Edited 1 times.
|
||
|
jim 1 |
|||
|
Posts: 9218 (26-Jul-2008 04:36:40) Generally Obscure |
Syphon -
WW was not a politician, not really. He was ID'ed by one of Ryan's co-investors as WW gave his intro speech as he became Princeton Pres. That guy and Ryan then pushed him to run and win NJ Gov. WW got all his $ from 2 sources, half from Ryan. He only won the election because of the TR and Taft confrontation that split the other party. |
||
|
richard roper |
|||
|
Posts: 69 (26-Jul-2008 09:58:22) |
Wilson was heavily influenced by his father who was a presbyterian minister in his attitudes, and is described as "no compromise being a Wilson
characteristic".
Keynes at the Versailles peace conference described him as "entirely theological". He had only been in politics a short time, for two years as governor of New Jersey, before becoming president, after a long voting process at conventions in both cases. However, he was also beholden to the British. The pro-British Col. House headhunted Wilson as a presidential candidate, a political "fixer" from Texas, he came out of retirement and sold his Texas estates and boughtanapartment in New York to find a presidential candidate. House then became his political advisor. |
||
|
richard roper |
|||
|
Posts: 70 (26-Jul-2008 10:09:25) |
Here is a quote from Wilson's activities at Princetown;-
"Wilson refused any proposed compromises that stopped short of abolishing the clubs because he felt that to compromise "would be to temporize with evil."". |
||
|
Syphon1 |
Thanks for the Additional Wilson Info | ||
|
Posts: 554 (26-Jul-2008 13:48:48) |
I've now amended my my thoughts on a possible second term from maybe to not a hope.
If Wilson won't bend then you'd find the Democrats will not renominate him as their candidate, so unless there are some major reversals in Letterstime the rest of his first term will be a lame duck administration. The more I think of this the more certain I become that Wilson's political career is over. Maybe the stress of fighting an un-winnable race brings on that stroke I talked of early. If Wilson tries to veto congress or impede them then we could be facing the very fist impeachment of a sitting president one that even his own party might back. After all it's in their best interest to have a new man at the helm even if for only half a year in which he can spend that time blaming Wilson for all the problems that have happens and deflection it from the Democrat platform. One thing is for certain if Wilson won't bend and from what you guys say he won't then the Papers will crucify him and anybody who runs against him will probably win office. I wonder if the Democrats will go back to Bryant again and maybe this time he'll win. If the previous pods weren't enough for the Central Powers to come out ahead on points the a truely neutral US will ensure that this is the worst case for them. This would be an interesting post Letterstime story maybe done as eulogy after Wilson death from that stroke. I can just see some biographies now Wilson - The Manipulated Man.
We satisfy our endless needs
And justify our bloody deeds
In the name of destiny
And in the name of God
David
|
||
|
Dave Bender |
First impeachment of a sitting president. | ||
|
Posts: 6835 (26-Jul-2008 15:26:17) |
I doubt it. The next presidential election is only a year away. Impeaching President Wilson during the fall of 1915 would be a political disaster for the
Democratic Party. TF Ryan and his friends will exert pressure on people like Colonel House to keep Wilson quiet for the remainder of his term in office.
|
||
|
Syphon1 |
|||
|
Posts: 555 (27-Jul-2008 01:32:45) |
Dave Bender wrote: Assassination Dave to quiet a political embarrassment?
The Democrats need to get rid of any association with Wilson. Expel him from the Democrat Party so he is considered an independent? The Democrats need to do something or they are dead at the next election.
We satisfy our endless needs
And justify our bloody deeds
In the name of destiny
And in the name of God
David
|
||
|
NewGolconda |
|||
|
Posts: 3574 (27-Jul-2008 02:00:16) Commonwealth Moderator |
Isnt this all upside down?
In OTL Wilson was unpopul for not taking a tougher stand against Germany, and capaigned and won on the theme he kept us out of war. In this time line Germany is causing less angst. Doesnt that make Wilsons pre 1916 policy more popular? Wilson, 1916 a man for our times? |
||
