What if America never entered ww1?

Except the post it was replying to never said it was a whole mutiny, which by the way, would never fucking happen.

If Germany wins World War I, there's no Hitler or Nazis or Holocaust. Seems nice.

>talking about WW1 Germany
>mentions Hitler
>mentions white supremacy

french troops reinforced the italians because america was able to come to the rescue

gr8 b8 m8

Very little changes. The Spring Offensive may have had a little more success because more time would be allotted to its planning and coordination (Germany would not be forced to attack as quickly as it did if they weren't threatened by increasing Allied numbers). That said, by that point in the war the Allies were in full scale total war mode and Germany was already struggling to cope because of the British blockade. The only difference America made at that point was in helping French morale and adding a few more numbers on the Allied side, even though it is highly likely the Germans would have been outfought and outgunned by the British and French alone, owing to the exhaustion and lack of coordination of the Germans.

If you count land lease and shit as participate in the war the victory of germany would be absolute

If you count land lease and shit as participate in the war the victory of germany would has be absolute

>Treaty will favor Germany

Read again retard

THREAD MOVED.
>

One of the reasons that Petain was able to restore control after Chemin des Dames was promising to wait for "the tanks and the Americans." Without the morale boost of knowing that the Americans were coming (even if they didn't do that much in hindsight), hopelessness and despair probably would have cracked the French defenses

bamp

the Austrians were stopped by the Italians at the Piave before they even encounter French and Anglo forces

France imo would not mutiny to the degree their defenses collapses. The mutinies may have ground any offensives to a halt, however. The front would stalemate at best and Germany would starve itself out, if the Brits didn't just break through alone with vastly superior numbers of tanks.

Wasn't there a lot of support for the Russian way of exiting the war in France?

I think there was a lot of support for white peace; but lets be honest-- Russia needed a full revolution and then some to white peace. They literally wouldn't even after the Tsar abdicated, the provisional government decided to continue the war. For France to exit the war white peace while its territory was occupied with so many men dead imo would not occur unless the military literally turned around and threatened force on the government. I don't think the mutiny's would descend that far.

>white peace
Russia accepted the loss of millions of square miles of territory, the Germans were asking for far less from the French.

>Americans were relevant in WW1
Hahahah nooooo

>Germ*ns lose the war anyway, it only takes longer probably
>Austria Hungary falls apart

Literally nothing relevant would change, only now you wouldn't get 'Murricans saying "We wuz trenches and shit" or "muh lost battalion"

Actually, yeah I guess Brest-Litovsk was far from a white peace. But, the point stands it took two revolutions to force their exit from the war, and France was nowhere close to a revolution.

I guess that's fair. There was significant pacifist and communist sentiment in France though.

>What if America never entered ww1?
Would have had no effect at all.
When America finally entered it was nearly over anyway.

Even if the USA didn't enter the war the same thing happens. The entire French army WONT mutiny (Germany also faced mutinys but continued fighting up till their entire army collapsed) Britain would just use more colonial troops and the German army would collapse just as it did in the 100 days offensive. Worst case is the armistice is called in 1919 or Germany is completely overrun. Their army just couldn't handle 1917/8 when everyone else stepped up their game.

>When America finally entered it was nearly over anyway.
Apsolutely not. Most likely scenario would be a peace with Germany - UK. Or German victory

...

No americans means no spring offensive, germans bolster the defenses with the units from the east and its just a stalemate.

what is the spring offensive?
what is needing to win before the Americans arrive?

but goyim, the germans where inherintly racist and feelings of ubermencschen were common in germany from the start, which is why such a testerone fuelled cultured nation had to go

no, the first reich was the HRE, nor Prussia

So would it just be a stalemate?

Not if you take into account the successes of the Entente in the 100 days offensive. Even if they didn't have the Americans their assault and combined arms doctrine was proving to be superior. The entente were all preparing for the 1919 offensive which would have used such revolutionary tactics and armour along with fresh troops from the colonies and other theaters. Plan 1919 would provide the basis for both Blitzkrieg and Deep battle with new more reliable weapons and vehicles which Germany just couldn't compete with.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_1919

Aksthually, feelings of white supremacy were common in Germany, and in many Western nations, in the early 20th century. I can't speak for Europe, but this was the height of eugenics backed meme science in America. Following the Grand Dicking of Africa theories of white biological superiority were commonplace and science was invented to back those actions through rational thought.

>small skull, small brain
Get fucked negro brainlets.

The allies simply had greater resources at their disposal. Most key; tanks. The Germans could never match allied tank production by a tenth. The only way for the war to stalemate is the allies refusing to go on offensives for one reason or another.

You do realize that Germany was about to take paris before the us came right?

Only the British made a sufficient amount of tanks, and they were used late in the war.
The French hardly had any

Yes, but going forward into 1918 the only victory I see for Germany is French mutiny into capitulation, or some stunning offensive that seizes Paris/knocks France out of the war. In the long term they're going to be pushed back if the allies continued offensives, or if the front stagnates.

That's what I'm saying.

The French Army had more tank that the British...

The US army was irrelevant during all the German offensive...

French mutiny is a meme

firstworldwar.com/weaponry/tanks.htm

The Germans made maybe 20 tanks in the whole war. The Brits and French made thousands, and were learning how to use them.

Forget it. The Americans helped, but the result would have been German defeat in any case.

The difference would have been in the peace treaty. If Brits & Frence did it alone, breakup of Germany would have been the result.

Probably a military stalemate, but I don't believe the German endgame would appreciably change at all.
If American credit had been cut off to the Entente in 1915 that's a whole other story, though. It's shocking how much the Allied war effort was being fueled more or less solely by US loans. Without them I can't see how the war effort could've continued. There would've been an armistice before the end of the year.

>The difference would have been in the peace treaty

that would have been inevitable if the Germans still lossed

No, Central Powers would collapse either way. They were starving already. British blockade was the key factor in the war, not US entering at the last moment.

THREAD MOVED!
>3343379

The League Of Nations would never have been established. The course of the a fighting wouldn't have been drastically altered for practical purposes.

would have ended in a stalemat and thing would have carried on as useual in the euro trash continent