Timeline for answer to What would World War I outcomes be if the Tunguska event had occurred over London in 1908? by HDE 226868
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 18, 2019 at 20:39 | comment | added | Mark | Your "World War II" scenario is completely unbelievable. Given a Triple Alliance victory, Wilhelm II retains power. Lack of political instability means that the Deutsche Arbeiterpartei never forms, or if it does form, the authorities very quickly arrest the leadership, and Hitler remains an NCO in the German army. The successor conflict to World War I isn't triggered by German expansionism, but rather by French irredentism or Soviet expansion, and looks very different (eg. an Anglo-German-Austrian alliance fighting the Soviet Union in what is now Poland). | |
| Aug 11, 2015 at 10:02 | comment | added | roryok |
I would guess the Irish would rather just live and let live, and stay out of it all. On the contrary, when Ireland had an uprising against British rule in 1916, the call to arms was "England's misery is Ireland's opportunity". It's likely this event would have been seen by republicans as an "opportunity" to free Ireland from British rule.
|
|
| Mar 19, 2015 at 12:59 | comment | added | BentNielsen | I don't think the US were in a position to make a big early intervention in Europe, as the US Army was rather small in 1914. It would have required a build up starting about 1908-10 to have an army that could stop the Germans. | |
| Nov 13, 2014 at 21:29 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Oldcat Very good points. I think, though, that the Nazis would still slowly grow in popularity, and would eventually rise to power. But I hadn't considered the territorial implications. | |
| Nov 13, 2014 at 17:40 | comment | added | Oldcat | I see no chance of a Nazi takeover in Germany after a WWI victory. The Kaiser is a winner, not an exile, and the army is not humiliated by loss and Versailles. Germany might well have hegemony over the Low Countries and a slice of the East. There wouldn't even be a Poland or a broken up Austria Hungary. | |
| Oct 31, 2014 at 0:08 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @jammypeach Ahh, I should have remembered him. I did a research paper on him two years ago. | |
| Oct 31, 2014 at 0:04 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1624 characters in body
|
| Oct 22, 2014 at 10:45 | comment | added | jammypeach | Don't forget the jet engine - Frank Whittle (a briton) started development of it in 1928, while Hans Von Ohain started development (apparently coincidentally) of a similar engine in 1935. Without Whittle, Allied jet engines would be set back, and without the opportunity afforded by the Allies to study Germany's jet engines after winning WWII, the Allied jet fighter development would have been decades behind Germany's. Considering how they were used after WWII, this would have made a huge difference to the balance of power. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_jet_engine | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 23:48 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Twelfth The edit is finally complete. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 23:47 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Mark I think I addressed your remarks. But yeah, decades was a bit of an over-estimate. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 23:46 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 2081 characters in body
|
| Oct 16, 2014 at 23:32 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Twelfth Ah, my misunderstanding. I'm currently making a big edit that should address your (valid) points. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 23:31 | comment | added | Twelfth | @HDE226868 - Sorry, wasn't challenging that they did include reparation payments, the treaty definitely did...My issues is I'm having problems seeing a Nazi party rise in a Germany that wasn't suffering under Versailles to the extent they were. Nazi's were a fringe movement at best prior...In my opinion, no Versailles = no Nazi's = no hitler-esque WWII. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 23:03 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Twelfth I believe the treaty did include reparation payments - and it was those that I was referencing. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 20:19 | comment | added | Twelfth | Disagree with an inevitable wwII win by Germany. The implications of Versailles was directly responsible for the rise of Mussolini as they felt quite shorted in it leading to their capture of ethopia prior to WWII (Tojo in Japan as well as they were an ally in WWI that got nothing from Versailles). It was reperation payments put onto germany after WWI (somewhere in the range of 1/2 trillion dollars in todays scale) that ultimately put Hitler and his Nazi party at the helm. No humiliation of Versailles never would have seen the rise of the fringe Nazi's | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 8:41 | comment | added | Mark | I disagree on radar: in addition to the UK, the US, USSR, Germany, France, and Japan all went into WWII with working radar systems. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 8:38 | comment | added | Tim B | I'm not convinced WW2 was inevitable with WW1 having gone to Germany, I agree with your assessment other than that though. | |
| Oct 16, 2014 at 1:31 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 189 characters in body
|
| Oct 15, 2014 at 23:43 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | By the way, I would be grateful if anyone who knows history better than I (i.e. anyone who has studied at the college level) could correct any historical of logical errors I've made here. | |
| Oct 15, 2014 at 23:37 | history | answered | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |