What are you thoughts on the the schlieffen plan?

What are you thoughts on the the schlieffen plan?
How would you change it?
Was it autistic?

Other urls found in this thread:

vi.wikipedia.org/wiki
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

The amount of distance that needed to be covered even in Von Moltke's "shortened" plan was unfeasible. The original conception of wheeling all the way around and striking Paris from the northwest was just lunacy.

It's absolutely suicidal because Belgium will inevitably drag Britain into the war, and that can really ruin your day. The best possible option in that whole debacle was to merely hold the line against the French, as the Vosges and Alsace-Lorraine in general are one hell of a chokepoint.

Play defense on the West (other than occupying Luxembourg) rather than trying to strike France first. Place the main offensive focus on Russia to try and occupy as much territory as possible before they can fully mobilize.

What moon nigger language is that map written in?
Is it It*alian?

Before the start of the war, the French army had spent massive amounts of money on upgrading France's artillery, and stockpiling vast numbers of artillery shells. They believed that they had enough shells stockpiled to last for 3 months in the event of war. Despite all this preparation, it almost wasn't enough. The French army started experiencing serious shortages of artillery shells within the first three weeks of the war. During the first battle of the Marne, more artillery shells were fired by the French army alone than had been fired by both sides of the Franco-Prussian war for the entirety of that conflict (same applies to the German Army). There was a very real possibility of a German breakthrough happening simply because the French were running out of artillery shells. If not for the BEF, there is no doubt that France would have been defeated by the end of 1914.

>mistaking Vietnamese for Italian
Ami go home

From a purely military perspective, it made sense to attack through Belgium because it meant you could avoid mountains and French fortifications. From a broader viewpoint, however, it was absolutely cancer because it instantly marked Germany as the aggressor, the bad guy in the eyes of most of the world.

Go through Italy instead.

>Risking the wrath of based Cadorna.

>Cadorna is left defending the French Alps
Perfect

the problem was the plan was so specific outdated, and they literally had no other plans. A war led by retards.

>show up on enrollment day
>you are signed up for the outside ring

>occupy
>Russia
Great idea, then once you've diverted enough of your resources into a logistical system that lets your army even survive in Russia, France will just come around from behind and kick your shit in.

He's just trying to try to hide the glory of Vietnam's absolute destruction of Italy
vi.wikipedia.org/wiki

PASTANIGGERS BTFO BY THE JUNGLE NIGGERS

the Germans were running out of shells and troops at he Marne too, go home Lindybeige

Wheel up instead of down.

You do realize they were allied, right? Italy only left later on. Then again, you could transfer troops to Italy, possibly

Going on the defensive in the west and letting France declare war on Germany would have been the best.

Not take as long in Belgium. The plan failed because they spent weeks cracking open fortresses and putting antwrept to siege

>implying Britain wouldn't decide to enter the war with or without Belgium being invaded

not weaken the right flank. They weakened the right fucking flank to bolster against Russia, and lost the war right there. The divisions diverted to the east didn't make much of a difference either, they didn't arrive in time for Tannenburg, which the Germans won anyways.

The Prussian General Staff was too conservative, which is bound to happen in an autocratic government. They lucked out having Bismarck around to raise them as high as they became, and then had a shitty roll of the dice with the next set of leaders, who were shit.

Only in case of a defensive war.
By being the aggressor Germany shot themselves in the foot.

The plan was good, its execution was poor, It was done right in ww2


If they executed the plan right and knocked France out of the war early on it would be certain victory for the central powers. The British would be easily crushed once Russia and France are out of the war

>The British would be easily crushed once Russia and France are out of the war
>Kriegsmarine can't even go out to sea.
Sure thing buddy.

What do you think this is, the napoleonic wars? The Germans had a powerful navy and aviation, they could blast their way across the channel

Yet they didn't and never attempted to because they knew they couldn't win.

...

Nah I think with both Russia and France out of the war the British will sign a peace treaty.

1) how the hell does the Kriegsmarine beat the Royal Navy?

2) even in WW2 when Britain was weaker relative to everyone else compared to WW1, and the Germans actually knock France out early, and they're still in a pact with the Russians so they can concentrate all efforts on attacking Britain they STILL can't defeat Britain or even get a peace treaty.

they were fighting a two front war, invading england would be their last concern

kek

this. For like 2 years Hitler was trying to mount an invasion on Britain but knew it wasn't feasible.

>The British would be easily crushed once Russia and France are out of the war
I presume this is WW1?
This has got to be bait right? How the fuck is the German navy going to beat the RN?
They got decimated within 1 year and Germany blockaded

>how the hell does the Kriegsmarine beat the Royal Navy?
why not?

Because they're considerably smaller and undertrained

they couldn't get past Skagerrak sweetie

>undertrained
what is that supposed to mean?

IMO, when the entire war effort of the CP would be concentrated on Britain, the German navy and air force would be able to challenge the British

but you're right, i was wrong to say they would be easily crushed, there would need to be a big brutal decisive battle on the seas and skies around the english channel, the war would not end with France and Russia

>Because they're considerably smaller
true
>and undertrained
Wut

but this pretty much what worked

British foreign policy has revolved around keeping the continent divided to prevent invasion of home islands. A germanic europe is the last thing brits at the time would tolerate. It would be napoleon all over again for the uk

Napoleon wasn't a threat

No, what worked was funding communists to kill the Russians from the inside.
And then they lost the war anyways because they mulched their best troops attempting to autisticly rush for Paris because they managed to bring the Americans into the war on the side of the Entente,

>what are you thoughts on the the schlieffen plan?

Surpassed. Was a diplomatic blow and his execution didn't match the material and warfare context of his time.

>how would you change it?

>hold the line at Metz and deal with the russians.

Was it autistic?
Well, the whole country was run by a autistic, so...

It could work if their army was bigger.

...

they should have done the opposite
BTFO russia first, then go for France

One of the main reasons Britain attacked Denmark and Norway was to prevent the Danish fleet from falling into Napoleon’s hands. Clearly they saw him as a serious threat, even if you don’t

Napoleon was a big threat. If her had achieved real hegemony over Continental Europe after defeating Russia, he could have easily diverted massive amounts of resources to the French Navy and out-produced the Royal Navy.

Once parity on numbers is achieved you only need to be unlucky once and then you're fucked.

wot?

>biggest mass mobilization in history
>it needs to be even bigger
How could they have known?

well every time the germans tried to fight the royal navy they ended up taking worse losses relatively speaking.

take the hood/bismarck exchange, the british lost one old battlecruiser the germans lost 25% of their total capital ship strength and one of only 2 units they had that could tangle with a RN battleship with any hope of victory.

and after jutland, even though they blew up more RN than they lost they still had a worse ratio after the battle in terms of ships fit for action, and that was literally the most favourable outcome they could have achieved that day.

>there would need to be a big brutal decisive battle on the seas and skies around the english channel, the war would not end with France and Russia
and heres the rub, ignore airpower, just ignore it, we are talking 1914-1915 here there is fuck all in terms of bombing capability and little more in terms of reconnaissance capability in any airforce at this point certainly in a maritime context.

and in terms of seapower the RNs grand fleet wasnt going to lose such a confrontation, the germans celebrate sinking the battlecruisers at jutland, and tend to forget that even with defective ammo and a short window of engagement the RN heavily damaged a great many of their battleships for very little in return. a decisive engagement between the 2 fleets doesnt end with the high seas fleet still being above water even if the RN do take losses

>implying Britain would do more than blockade the germs and in any way help the French if not for Belgium.

>It would be napoleon all over again for the uk

And just like with Nappy, the Brits would cut a deal until they saw another opportunity to attack.

>mountains
>in northern France

they moved as fast as they could through Belgium, it's simply they hadn't anticipated the Belgians would go full scorched earth on their infrastructure, nor that they had the capacity to do it that fast

they needed to crack open the forts because when they tried going past them they suffered horrifying casualty rates and they needed to siege antwerp because it wasn't just a city, it was also one of the biggest ports in the world, perfect for say, landing a british army to fuck you in the arse

heck if it weren't for some tactical blunders on the allied's part they could have stalled the war even longer in Belgium

The Germans capabilities were entirely focused on the land war, if France and Russia were knocked out the Germans would devote their entire military machine on England, only then could we see who would come out on top. The best chance of the British would be to hold off as long as possible the Germans from landing, when you're playing a defensive game the odds are not in your favor.

Speculating that the Germans would stand no chance against England is pointless, you could speculate that the British could easily knock the Ottomans out of the war by invading Istanbul itself but we all know how that ended.

shipbuilding capacity.

essentially the british could significantly outbuild the rest of europe, there is no way the germans could sustain that pace for as long as the british, nor could they gain close the gap in terms of ship numbers.

so you have the british unable to intervene decisively on land, and the germans unable to cross the channel in the face of the british, neither able to land a decisive blow.

in that conflict economics and demographics in the long run favour the empire, certainly with france restive under the germans and russia likewise hard to hold.

The difference is that if Germany defeats both Russia and France in WW1 then the UK has no potential continental allies strong enough to fight Germany with. They can't do it themselves.

Germany won on the Eastern Front in World War I. It's not about occupying all of Russia anyway, basically Poland + Lithuania + Latvia

They did win because Russia was going through a revolution, then a civil war. Were that the case, they would not seek a separate peace unless the Western Front was lost.

>shipbuilding capacity
Are you fucking joking? How fucking old are you? You're arguing like a 12 year old.

IF the British repel every German attack they would be at a stalemate, no British victory, and a very big IF.

...

>, It was done right in ww2
The von Schlieffen plan has absolutely nothing to do with the von Manstein plan, brainlet. Hell, the von Manstein plan is even about inducing a false sense of the von Schlieffen plan repeating, when it's absolutely not.

They did know, or at least, they should have. Schlieffen's own notes indicated that he believed his plan required a minimum of 96 divisions in order to have a reasonable chance of success. He wanted to change's Germany's laws regarding conscription to increase the size of Germany's standing army. In Germany, 55% of eligible men were conscripted into the army when they reached a certain again. This was less aggressive then the French system, which conscripted 80% of eligible men. Schlieffen was never able to get the German government to approve the changes that he wanted to make. His immediate successor, Helmuth von Moltke, also made attempts to push for a larger army, and was equally unsuccessful. The end result was that Germany began the Great War with only 79 divisions.

It might seem very odd that the German government was so resistant to increasing the size of their army, but there is a reason for it, and it had a lot to do with the Prussian nobility, Junkers, being unwilling to share power with other parts of Germany.

>They did win because Russia was going through a revolution, then a civil war.
Germany played a big role in orchestrating those events.

I think the guy you responded to over-estimated the Kreigsmarine, but in WW1, Britain might have been brought to the negotiation table by France being knocked out quickly. A favorable peace treaty for Britain might very well have been accepted if it looked like Germany was winning.

If Germany had managed to somehow subdue both France and Belgium in a timely manner, then yes, Britain would have become largely irrelevant for the simple reason that they would have no foothold on the continent where they could send their troops.

With the power of hindsight, i can deduce that it should have been scrapped altogether or done after the eastern victory.

>Napoleon wasn't a threat

>and out-produced the Royal Navy.
Britain had a larger industrial capacity than all Europe combined, this would never happen, if it could, Napoleon would've done it as Britain severely undermined Napoleons' efforts

It's not even about that. Other guy had it wrong, and it's more about:
>collapses your economy

Who collapses whose economy?

If Britain can't sell its goods to anyone but its empire, with Napoleon ascertaining a "continental blockade" deal on all Europe, things sound pretty dire for them.

>it's an evil continental empire tries to collapse britain's economy episode

when will they learn, eh lads?

No. Its empire was enough

you are trying to argue that the germans could somehow overwhelm the royal navy, and cross the channel.

that was always out of the question, due to the size of the royal navy and its superior shipbuilding capability. equally out of the question is britain invading mainland europe without a continental ally.

in such a stalemate, as the post you replied to pointed out would exist - the word stalemate was not used but 'neither able to land a decisive blow.' seems to be a stalemate- in such a scenario the superior economic base of the british empire would probably allow the british to outlast a inherently unstable german occupation of europe

>equally out of the question is britain invading mainland europe without a continental ally.
And they'll be saying that same thing as the beaches of Normandy are filled not with Americans and Brits, but endless waves of Indian conscripts shitting their way through France

The Normandy landings were only possible because the Soviets were keeping the majority of Germany's forces occupied. Hitler and his generals were focused on the eastern front, because that is where most of the real fighting was happening.

Even if the entire German population was conscripted to defend France they could not hold off the onslaught of infinite poos. All Europe (including Britain) will sink beneath the waves under the weight of so much excrement forming the European ocean

>De Dolfjin

is this Sminem's brother?

How did I just know this was in Russia before looking at the watermark in the corner

They pretty much stayed on the time table or within a few days of it until that air head Moltke decided to listen to Ruprecht and weaken the right wing to try a double envelopment.

>shitty 1980s wallpaper
>outdated PC and furniture
>goblino looking kid
>weird fixation with flower patterns
>picture is current but somehow looks like it was taken in the early 1990s
Yeah it's Russia alright.

Both Britian and France had plans to go through Belium too lmao. Its not like Germany was the only one to realize how useful the Belgium back door was.

And Britian had a fundamental problem in its government.

Grey, the foreign minister had basically promised France they were allies while simutaneously telling the public and the liberals in parliament they had a free hand.

When the war broke out there was no coherent strategy in Britian of forcing the upholding of 100 year old treaties or even neutrality of other countries.

Where were they when Albania was occupied by Montenegro in 1912-13? Britian Guaranteed her borders. Why did britian mobilize the navy against France when France broke the treaty that gave England Egpyt and France Morrocco and Germany the right to do business in Morrocco?

Beligum was irrelevant to britian unitl Gray needed a way to convince the public to go to war. He didn't give a fuck about Belgium. He gave a fuck that he had secured Egpyt by promising France an alliance and suddenly he had to back up what he said.

The poos weren't going to fight for the bongs. This "muh empire" nonsense is just bong fantasy. Absent the Americans, they were fucked, in both wars.

Poos volunteered to fight for Britain en mass, and were used mostly in the colonies.

Poos volunteered to be clothed and fed, user. I bet more Singapore-surrendered poos joined the Japanese army after 1942 then joined the bong army in either war.

>implying that kid isnt happier than you
He just got off runescape and is about to get stuck into some home made goulash.
Life is good

Over a million Poos joined the army in WW2.

>Both Britian and France had plans to go through Belium too lmao
Belgium could have held off the brits for a long ass fucking time though, without any superheavy artillery present on the continent the brits would have been unable to crack the belgian forts

Utterly brainlet post.